William Shakespeare in DEAF-WORLD:

Twelfth Night and Sign Language Performance

Hailey Scott
Theatre Scholarship and Research Methods
September 20, 2021
 Scott 1

Abstract

The long history of Shakespearean performance and the relatively short history of American
Sign Language performance converge in the creation of sign language translation of
Shakespeare’s theatrical works. The spectrum of performance philosophy that describes the ways
in which theatre involving sign language performance provides the lens through which to
evaluate productions and their relationship to Deaf culture; Deaf culture being distinct from the
physiological condition of hearing loss. One such production is the 2000 Amaryllis Theatre
Company’s American Sign Language version of Twelfth Night, also known as the ASL
Shakespeare Project. Director Peter Novak provides an in-depth look at the eighteen month
process that gave way to the final translation and performance, which was then recorded and
distributed via the ASL Shakespeare Project Website. I analyze his primary account of the
production through the lens of disability studies, and specifically Deaf performance studies in the
hopes of explaining the particular strengths that are showcased by the approach utilized by the
project team.
 Scott 2

The works of William Shakespeare have long been considered among the best of English

literature, and feature the height of beauty and complexity found in the English language. For

centuries the emphasis of Shakespearean performance has been on the accurate delivery of the

Bard’s speeches and dialogue, with much prestige being heaped upon those actors who are

considered to have the greatest mastery of the language. Simply because the vocal emphasis has

been dominant for so long, the question remains: is spoken English performance the truest or

most superior version of the Shakespearean theatrical canon? There are a number of alternative

theatrical practices which challenge the established audist perspective.

One notable variation on traditional Shakespearean performance is that of American Sign

Language performance. ASL theatre itself was pioneered by the Connecticut-based National

Theatre of the Deaf(NTD) in 1967. The NTD set the precedent of presenting plays in both

English and sign language simultaneously, therefore making their performances accessible to a

wider range of audiences. They broke into Shakespeare with their 1992 production of Ophelia by

Jeff Wanshel, which is a revisionist version of Hamlet. The potential for a strong Deaf

perspective on Shakespeare’s plays can be seen in the original mission statement of the NTD,

which proposed what deaf and sign language performance should set out to be, that says, “with

this initial aim, to find new meaning in more familiar work, we find the great strength of theatre

to elevate a group culturally: it reaches the mind through the heart - through experiences and

emotions common to all men, regardless of sophistication.”1 The works of Shakespeare fit this

vision perfectly by being a unique blend of high and low artforms that is extremely familiar to a

great deal of people. Other theatres have furthered the development of Deaf performances of

1
Hays, David. “The National Theatre of the Deaf-Present and Future.” American Annals of the Deaf 112, no. 4
(1967): 590–92. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44392145.
 Scott 3

Shakespere’s plays since the founding of the NTD, with a number of different approaches to this

type of performance.

In order to understand the artistry of producing Shakespere in ASL, one must first

understand the complexities of Deaf performance generally. Theatre involving deaf characters

and deaf performers can be considered on a spectrum from “inside” Deaf culture to “outside” the

culture. Generally speaking “deaf” is used to refer to the physiological condition of severe

hearing loss or lack of hearing, while “Deaf” denotes the unique culture of those who use ASL as

their primary mode of communication2. That community and culture being described here is

referred to with the phrase, best translated from ASL, as “DEAF-WORLD” 3. Regarding the

construction and integration of Deaf culture Jessica Berson uses this framework to mean that

inside plays are those by deaf artists and which prioritizes the experience of a deaf audience, and

outside productions are designed with both hearing and deaf audiences in mind, and all dialogue

is spoken as well as signed4. Deaf theatre scholars Dorothy Miles and Lou Fant make the further

distinction that to be considered Deaf theatre, with a capital D, the work must directly involve

situations unique to deafness or the interplay between deaf and hearing communities. The style

of theatre that utilizes a signing cast and a speaking cast, and/or works which are not specifically

about deaf characters would be considered what they call Sign Language Theatre5.

2
Kochhar-Lindgren, Kanta. "Hearing Difference across Theatres: Experimental, Disability, and Deaf
Performance." Theatre Journal 58, no. 3 (2006): 417-36. Accessed September 6, 2021.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25069869.
3
Berson, Jessica. "Performing Deaf Identity: Toward a Continuum of Deaf Performance." In Bodies in
Commotion: Disability and Performance, edited by Sandahl Carrie and Auslander Philip, 42-55. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press, 2005. Accessed September 6, 2021.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3998/mpub.92455.8.
4
Berson; 43
5
Miles, Dorothy May Squire. A History of Theatre Activities in the Deaf Community of the United States.
Unpublished thesis, Connecticut College, 1974., and Lou J. Fant. Sign Language Theatre and Deaf Theatre:
New De‹nitions and Directions. Northridge, Calif.: Center Deafness Publication Series, 1976.
 Scott 4

Based on these criteria, shows which simply provide ASL translations on top of classical

works would be considered both outside and Sign Language Theatre. However, this is not to say

that these plays must always integrate ASL from an outside perspective. Shakespeare never

included a character who was explicitly deaf in his works, meaning that any deaf perspective

must be brought to the work from the creatives involved in a specific production. I intend to

highlight one such production in depth: Amaryllis Theatre Company’s 2000 version of Twelfth

Night which demonstrates the ability of Shakespeare’s works to be innovatively and effectively

adapted for sign language performance, not only for accessibility but also for creative

interpretation.

Interestingly Twelfth Night, which is considered to be Shakespeare’s most musical, and

therefore most audibly rich play, became the target of the first full-scale direct sign language

translation and production of a Shakespeare play. It began as a collaboration between Deaf and

hearing artists at Yale University in 1999. It was then produced by the Amaryllis Theatre

Company in Philadelphia and premiered in 2000. The director of the project and production,

Peter Novak, wrote a detailed breakdown of the highly complicated process by which a complete

translation and performance of Twelfth Night came about. This paper will be heavily referencing

this article as it provides the greatest first-hand insight into the project. The project also created a

website as a resource for further study of the production. There are valuable secondary sources

that will be utilized as well.

Somewhat unique to Amaryllis’s Twelfth Night, there was not a character within the play

who is singled out as being deaf, rather deafness is treated as the default for all of the characters,

which the director described as the “entirely Deaf theatrical world of Illyria''6 . As such there are

6
Novak, Peter. “‘Where Lies Your Text?’: Twelfth Night in American Sign Language Translation.” Chapter. In
Shakespeare Survey, edited by Peter Holland, 61:74–90. Shakespeare Survey. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2008. doi:10.1017/CCOL9780521898881.006.
 Scott 5

two entirely separate casts for signing and speaking the lines, the signing cast being the one

actually seen on stage. Novak states that, “no hearing actor would be allowed to voice and sign

simultaneously as is often the case in other ASL-based productions” 7. Key to the philosophy of

this project was that the Deaf perspective be prioritized at all times and that the speaking

performers be totally subservient to the delivery of the sign language. Similar to the approach

favored by the National Theatre of the Deaf, Novak insisted that neither the sign language

translation nor delivery should conform to the rhythm or pace of the spoken English

performance, rather than the other way around. This was to avoid creating the implication that

ASL is simply a visual form of English that can be translated directly. Those involved wanted to

make it clear that ASL is its own language with its own structure and grammar distinct from

spoken English.

Throughout the translation process the timing between the spoken and sign lines was

tested, but only the timing of the speaker would be altered, with the precise timing established

later in rehearsal. On the ASL Shakespeare Project website there are several clips provided of the

actual performance that demonstrate how the simultaneous delivery was done onstage. The

speaking performers are never seen, presumably so that they would not be confused for any of

the characters they were meant to be portraying only verbally. As a hearing person who is not

conversant in ASL, it did take me some time to adjust to taking in and making sense of the

asynchosity of the two languages.

The ASL Shakespeare Project was not only interested in putting together a single onstage

production, but also in recording, collecting, and distributing material related to the project. This

was done with the intent of creating a blueprint for future American Sign Language adaptations

of Shakespeare, as well as an educational resource to inform others of the value of translating

7
Novak; 76
 Scott 6

classic works for deaf audiences. Near the beginning of Peter Novak’s article, he mentions two

examples of precursors to Amaryllis’s Twelfth Night: one from 1998 performed at the

Interborough Repertory Theatre, and another from 1985 produced by American Theatre Arts.

Novak gives a brief description of each of the versions and their approach to sign language

performance, and then notes that in the case of the latter no recordings of the translation or

published version of their script currently exist, rendering it impossible to study further at this

time8. He uses this fact to introduce his approach to adapting the same play with a strong

emphasis on using technology to ensure a record of the translation and performance would exist

long after it closed on the stage.

The digital artifacts created in the process of the ASL Theatre Project take a variety of

forms. Because ASL is a visually embodied language, written records of the translation would be

less than ideal for conveying it in its entirety. This process’s reliance on technology drives home

the fact that the project would have been nearly impossible to take on before the late 1990s. That

fact underscores both a weakness and a strength of a translation process like this, “since sign

language poetry and deaf theatre are strongly non textual (there is currently no agreed-upon

system for notating performances), they mark how meaning exceeds the text in ways that a

sound-based model of meaning exchange cannot.”9 Therefore, whenever a particular piece of the

ASL translation from the original text was agreed upon by the team it would be video recorded

as soon as possible. Peter Novak describes the undertaking:

The translation team quickly realized that it was impossible to delay the videotaping by

even a single day. Without recording a few pages at a time, immediately after translating

8
Novak; 74-75
9
Kochhar-Lindgren, Kanta. "Hearing Difference across Theatres: Experimental, Disability, and Deaf
Performance." Theatre Journal 58, no. 3 (2006): 417-36. Accessed September 6, 2021.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25069869.
 Scott 7

them, even the glosses became difficult to decipher the following day. As a result, the

team digitally videotaped the entire translation and analysed it as they progressed. Often,

the translators would find a more appropriate translation for certain words or phrases later

in the process, making earlier translations of the same word or phrase inconsistent with

the new translation. Repairing the inaccuracy required refilming and re-editing the earlier

digital text, a time-consuming and complicated process10.

Due to the specific nature of ASL translation, the inclusion of video technology proved to be

invaluable to the success of the production. Even though the signs and combination of signs that

would correspond to the Shakespearean text were decided on ahead of time, some room for

interpretation was left intentionally so that the deaf actors would have the freedom to bring

specificity to their individual performances11.

Perhaps the largest contribution to the technological record of Amaryllis’s Twelfth Night

is the ASL Shakespeare Project website. On the webpage one can find a series of video clips

performed in ASL describing several aspects of the production, including some of the

challenges, as well as strengths, that are unique to creating a Deaf Twelfth Night. Novak’s interest

in leaving an educational record with this production is thoroughly fulfilled by the material

provided on the website. Over twenty years after the translation first ran, one can still purchase a

DVD copy of the recording that was made. There are also a handful of lesson plan worksheets

designed to accompany a viewing of the recorded performance, presumably in a classroom

setting. These lesson plans are written with the goal of encouraging engagement with the

practices of sign language performance.

10
Novak; 77
11
Novak; 78
 Scott 8

The word play and rhyme found in Shakespeare’s comedy presented an interesting

opportunity for the sign language performance. One of the examples highlighted demonstrates

how a rhyme in English can be performed as a rhyme in ASL, which naturally has a different

way of signifying that multiple concepts “rhyme” with one another. The example shows a video

clip of an actor performing Olivia's lines which close Act I in ASL with the English text

available underneath.12 Although the relationship between the rhymes contained in the original

text and those in the sign language version are not direct, the effect is that there is a perceptible

emphasis on the language and the artful repetition thereof.

One of the more significant hurdles faced by the production was that of the actual staging

of the play. Because American Sign Language relies on conveying meaning with not only the

hands, but the entire upper body including the face, it was important that the actors were fully

visible at all times. This is of course a consideration specific to Deaf and sign language theatre,

Kanta Kochhar-Lindgren makes the observation that, “ASL is organized visually and spatially,

and thus has more in common with painting and cinema.”13 The necessity of visibility affected

the final design of the set as well the blocking of certain scenes.

Of particular note was Act 4 Scene 5 in which Malvolio is imprisoned and visited by

Feste. Because the script refers to the character being within a small dark space, traditionally this

scene is staged without the actor playing Malvolio being visible. The Amaryllis Company’s take

on the scene obviously couldn’t completely obscure the actor, rather they looked back to a 1914

production in which Malvolio was placed under the stage. In their version he was able to stick

his hands out from beneath a trap door and sign his lines to Feste.14 This choice of adaptation

12
“ASL Shakespeare: The Project, Challenges.” Accessed September 6, 2021. http://aslshakespeare.org/.
13
Kochhar-Lindgren;422
14
Novak; 83
 Scott 9

resulted in an additional layer for the performance, the implications of which Jessica Berson

explores further:

“Placing Malvolio under the stage and disrupting his ability to communicate heightened

the poignancy of the character’s desperation and highlighted the layers of deception and

false identities that underlie his predicament. Because Malvolio’s language was restricted

by his inability to use his body or face, the ASL translation was forced to experiment

with hybrid signs and gestures, finger spelling, and mime…”15

In this case the necessity to accommodate both the deaf cast and the audience helped innovate

interesting ways of staging Shakespeare.

Alongside the particular challenges that made producing a Deaf Twelfth Night difficult,

there were also areas, highlighted on the ASL Shakespeare Project website, where adapting the

play for sign language performance made the themes of the original play shine. Throughout Act

1 Scenes 4 and 5, there are several references to knowing someone as akin to being able to read

them like a book. For example Orsino says, “Cesario, Thou know’st no less but all. I have

unclasped To thee the book even of my secret soul.”.16 Because ASL is a visual language, Deaf

people literally read each other to communicate. The intimacy to which Shakespeare is alluding

becomes heightened when it is two deaf characters speaking to each other. The confessions of the

soul must be read; to be read and to be understood are one and the same.

Also of note is the fact that throughout the entire play, the word “hand” appears nearly

forty times17. Shakespeare uses the word to mean many things, from handwriting to one’s hand in

15
Berson; 51
16
Mowat, Barbara, and Paul Werstine. Twelfth Night | The Folger SHAKESPEARE, 2019.
https://shakespeare.folger.edu/shakespeares-works/twelfth-night/.
17
“ASL Shakespeare.” Accessed September 6, 2021. http://aslshakespeare.org/.
 Scott 10

marriage. This particular motif is perhaps best brought to the forefront through the use of sign

language performance.

In addition to drawing out the themes of Shakespeare’s work through sign language, great

effort was put toward integrating aspects of Deaf culture into the world of the play, making each

support and highlight the other. One such aspect which may feel most foreign to hearing

audiences is the idea of name signs, which are the signs that are specifically crafted to refer to a

single person in lieu of finger spelling; “name signs are typically crafted by a local Deaf person

to refer to a specific person with particular observed traits.” These signs are typically created and

assigned by a local leader of the Deaf community who will ensure that each name sign does not

conflict with those that are already in use.18

In the case of Twelfth Night, multiple characters have their intended physical

characteristics and personality traits already reflected in their English names; including Sir Toby

Belch, Sir Andrew Aguecheek, and Malvolio. That demonstrates an interesting link between the

shared sensibilities of Shakespare and American Sign Language. The translation team on the

project assigned the characters name signs with these aspects in mind. The name signs used were

not a literal translation of the names, such as Belch, but a unique combination of signs that evoke

both the name and word. To use Toby Belch as an example, his name sign began with the letters

“TB” followed by a signed representation of a belch.19 The creation of name signs ties back into

director Peter Novak’s vision of the entirely Deaf world of Illyria, it is both the whimsical

kingdom of the play and an interwoven Deaf community.

18
McDonnell, Maureen. "Signing Shakespeare: Staging American Sign Language in Cymbeline." Shakespeare
Bulletin 35, no. 1 (Spring, 2017): 37-63.
http://ezproxy.baylor.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/signing-shakespeare-staging-
american-sign/docview/1876460330/se-2?accountid=7014.
19
Novak; 80
 Scott 11

Malvolio’s name sign went through a different process in its formulation. As part of the

dramaturgical research done for the production, there was an extensive review of the visual

history of Shakespeare’s world and of Twelfth Night. This included collecting several paintings

related to the play directly, with one portrait of an actor in the role of Malvolio lending the

greatest tangible influence on the translation and performance. The portrait features the actor

making a gesture which went on to inform Malvolio’s name sign20. His sign is an example of not

drawing on any meaning inherent to the name in itself, as with Belch or Aguecheek, but from a

visual vocabulary tied to the history of the play.

Malvolio: Possibly a Self-Portrait in the Role. John Boyne

Clearly as a piece of sign language art, the Amaryllis Theatre Company’s Twelfth Night

was rigorously crafted. It was created in such a way that would challenge traditional notions of

what is the best way of performing theatre generally and Shakespeare specifically. The basis of

theatrical performance is usually predicated on certain assumptions regarding the abilities of both

the cast and the audience. Disability scholar Carrie Sandahl describes the default space as

20
Novak; 79
 Scott 12

“usually arranged on the phenomenological experiences of two hearing and seeing bodies in

communication with one another.”21 Rather than simply providing an ASL interpretation with the

performance, which is itself an all too uncommon accommodation, they foregrounded the sign

language and made it impossible to ignore. Although the production was designed to be enjoyed

by hearing and deaf people equally, the very act of prioritizing a visual representation of

Shakespeare’s play deconstructs the status quo of who theatre audiences are assumed to be. As

Maureen McDonnel points out in her article on another sign language Shakespeare production,

even the word “audience” creates an expectation of hearing ability. She goes on to state that

performing the play in sign language offers “an anti-audist, anti-colonial linguistic choice.”22

The Twelfth Night project also defies categorization based on the criteria described at the

beginning of this paper. On the surface it appears to be securely in the realm of outside or Sign

Language Theatre. There is nothing specific to deafness in the content of the play, and it was

directed by a hearing artist. However, deaf artists were central to the collaboration that created

the translation and American Sign Language was employed as an aspect of the world of the play

as imagined by the company, not only as an accessibility measure. This particular production

attempts to straddle the hearing and Deaf worlds simultaneously, while foremost doing justice to

the world of the play.

The creative team behind the project seemed keenly aware of the significant precedent

that could be set through the creation of the production and the detailed record of how it came to

be. Director Peter Novak saw what he believed to be a gap in the field of Deaf Shakespeare

performance and studies and so ensured that this production would provide ample material for

21
Sandahl, Carrie. “Considering Disability: Disability Phenomenology’s Role in Revolutionizing Theatrical
Space.” Journal of dramatic theory and criticism 16, no. 2 (2002): 17–32.
22
McDonnell; 38, 43
 Scott 13

future theatrical artists to further the field. The “entirely deaf theatrical world of Illyria” stands as

an example of the potential for alternative approaches to the works of Shakespeare.