Home

Advertisement

allythecrazy1 [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
allythecrazy1

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

John Ahart and William Bell [Dec. 9th, 2007|12:57 am]
[mood |accomplished]

William Ball's book, "A Sense of Direction", was interesting, but served as more of a guideline than an actual instructional manual. The excerpt that I found interesting was on page 113, and states, "The first off-book rehearsal is always a disaster. The young director should understand that when actors go off book for the first time, all the work achieved in rehearsal to that date- blocking, nuance, relationship, understanding of the situation, even contact and truthful talking- goes out the window.". This has always been my experience on stage, due to the fact that I'm too busy concentrating in the lines to remember the exact blocking. I've never been able to concisely state why being off-book and the first rehearsal clash, but Mr Ball does so excellently. Further, Ball states, "Just watch the actors. While they are wrestling with their lines, the director must sit in patience.". This is going to be extremely difficult to accomplish, because it is going to be hard not to nitpick every aspect of the production. However, I feel that by commiserating with Mr Ball, I will be better able to understand the situation when my actors forget their blocking when their script gets involved.

The quote that I found least helpful from "A Sense of Direction" comes from the section regarding structure of improvisation. It states: "I watch the improvisation very carefully, and if I see it going off the track, I will occasionally approach one of the actors and whisper a new objective that may throw the scene in a new direction." Granted, I'm not an improv scholar, but in my experience, the director's perception of "off track" is drastically different from what the actors may have been planning. In my experience, the entire point of improvisation is to come up with ideas and material without external supervision. Being whispered something, especially by a director, would be slightly insulting, especially if another idea was moments away from breaking the surface. Basically, the entire idea of structuring improv is a little absurd, apart from established theatre games. In my opinion, improvisation is supposed to be just that- improvisation. It's about spontaneity. It's about taking risks. It shouldn't be about acting according to suggestion, regardless of how powerful the commentator is. I plan to have very little improv in my show as a whole, but I do want to start rehearsals with improv games to teach the actors how to react on stage during crisis situations, or flubbed lines. I will not, however, "structure" this time of development- it's something that everyone has to discover personally.

In John Ahart's "The Director's Eye", the author provides a more comprehensive, philosophical view of direction, and more specifically, blocking. Most interesting to me was the Mystique of the Triangle, discussed on page 269-270. Ahart states: "If there were larger numbers of actor-symbols, they might be connected with lines showing triangle within triangles or multiple actors forming the legs of triangles". To me, this is an extremely powerful message, having just learned about the use of the triangle in everyday life. The Divine Proportion is used it mathematics to illustrate the point at which every equation should theoretically be solved. The human face, as well, is triangular-shaped, beginning with who triangle legs for eyes, and ending with the smaller mouth. The Divine Proportion also dominates the stage, demonstrating the "perfect" way that actors should communicate. While Ahart has mixed feelings about the triangle, it is interesting that he even brought it up. I will continue to strive to use the triangle in staging, knowing that it has been proven to be "pleasing" to the eye.

In terms of what I disagree with of Ahart's work, a quote on page 289 discusses if blocking is fun. Ahart states: "Not so surprisingly, these discoveries inevitably include interesting blocking.". While I appreciate Ahart's work, he very clearly has not been the member of a second-rate production...which may or may not have been directed by an Edison graduate. Anyway, what I'm attempting to convey is that not every show has fun blocking. In fact, when the director does not invest, very little is enjoyable about the show, at all. In order to make sure that this does not occur, I will do everything possible to make my show enjoyable to the students that I direct.
linkpost comment

"A Midsummer Night's Dream" by William Shakespeare [Mar. 4th, 2007|07:58 pm]

Blocking, references to time, and juxtaposition of dialogue over occurrence have the ability to completely transform a production and alter the impression that an audience receives. "A Midsummer Night's Dream" at the Kennedy Center portrayed the lives of young lovers through the art of ballet. The ballet primarily focused upon dancing, but involved speaking enough to convey and drive the plot. The production was a stunning expose of life, and its themes of spring and birth were extremely effective in convincing the audience that various characters throughout the story were under a spell.

 

The original dance patterns of Hermia, Helena, Lysander and Demetrius demonstrated to the audience the power of individual character development, even when the words themselves are challenging to interpret, or are non-existent. The actress portraying Hermia portrayed her character as a dainty societal woman, and the daughter of King Theseus. However, there is underlying rebellion beneath Hermia’s classy exterior, and this becomes evident when she abandons her upbringing and fleas to the forest with Lysander, whom she is not betrothed. Hermia’s friend, Helena, was portrayed as slightly less wealthy, and thus the steps of her ballet were slightly less defined. Hermia danced almost entirely on her toes, but had a tendency to droop slightly when Lysander approached her. This was symbolic of the fact that, though her character was strong in essence, her love Demetrius was enough to cripple her from her elevated throne. Helena pranced half on her feet and half on her toes, and when Demetrius, her ex-lover, appeared to be infatuated with Hermia, she bowed her head in solitude and surrender. Lysander and Demetrius, though very similar characters, effectively demonstrated the separation of their personalities through varied steps and leaps. Lysander, who is betrothed to and in love with Hermia, demonstrated his devotion through subtle grace and courtesy in his steps. Demetrius, thrilled to be escaping into the woods with Hermia, demonstrated his charisma and devotion through steps that appeared entirely willing to commit to a relationship. For example, he dipped frequently to meet Hermia’s gaze, and at one point leapt over a log, and moved it so that Hermia could travel through the forest more easily.

 

Additional characters, such as Queen Titania and King Oberon, were demonstrated with utmost class and eloquence. However, at one point, when Oberon and Titania begin to fight in regards to the custody of a child, they danced angrily through the stage, furiously twirling without regard to form or fashion of step. Their expressions conveyed utter distaste for each other, and they remained in a heated argument throughout the majority of the plot. At the end of Oberon and Titania’s “battle”, fairies appeared and shepherded Titania away daintily. This demonstrated that Titania was a woman of power, unused to receiving empty responses. Oberon was portrayed in a very masculine fashion, and his leaps seemed angry and controlling. Puck, the mischievous sprite, was continually associated with green symbols. Additionally, Puck moved with stealth and innocence, and even when the character made blunders, it was some how endearing to the audience. It was quite a contrast to witness anger in a ballet, because the dancing is typically associated with form and grace. However, through the use of blocking, all of the characters were able to convey their emotions at all times.

 

Even when the play was focused upon the events that occurred in the city, the abundant green symbolism left an impressive image upon the minds of the audience. The cityscape was highlighted with a number of buildings that had green foliage upon them. Also, green trees and bushes were prominent on the set at all times. Because green is also the color of jealous and the color of wealth, it seemed appropriate to all of the characters, because each them could be individually tied to jealousy, wealth or life anew. In the instance of Titania, all three applied. The time was represented through the aging on the various parts of the set, or the deepening/lightening of colors throughout the rest of the buildings in the city, which were also extremely realistic. It was apparent that the tale took place in the Ancient World, although the location was seemingly changed from Ancient Athens to a more metropolitan, and slightly more modern, location. When the side-story of Nick Bottom and his friends who were to perform a production of “Pyramus and Thisbe” for the wedding of King Theseus and Hippolyta developed, the setting changed to a slightly more urban environment. Because Nick Bottom and his troupe were commoners, slightly less was expected of them, and in addition, they were demonstrated in a much less wealthy light. The central town square where they performed was demonstrated as an effective meeting place for a variety of individuals, although it was apparent to the audience that is was much lower in class than the rest of the environments.

 

The director made interesting decisions while creating this drama. As mentioned previously, it seemed to have a slightly more “earthy” feel to it than other renditions of the comedy that I have seen in the past. It seems that the sole focus of this particular rendition was to create a surreal environment, while at the same time creating an interesting juxtaposition of the realities of love, friendship and the environment to overlap the fantasy. The choreographer also made unique decisions in terms of the varied levels of eloquence and determination conveyed by all of the performers. Essentially, it would appear that the production staff worked tirelessly to created varied illusions of the passing of time. For example, when the young lovers escaped to the woods, their clothing was altered when the scenes converged and the characters met. Because the females, due to Puck’s interference, become love-struck at intermittent parts during the production, the make-up that was applied to them created the appearance of flushed cheeks and devoted facial expressions. When Queen Titania became flustered, it was apparent with the lightly messy hairstyle that she sported. She approached King Oberon, enraged that he had had multiple affairs, and her hair was splayed away from her face in a way that indicated that she had been running her hands through it angrily backstage. King Oberon’s hair seemed unflappable, but the suit jacket that he wore became unbuttoned and opened more easily when he spoke the few lines that had been dedicated to him in the play. The fairies that supported Queen Titania during the dispute can only be described as “Tinkerbell-esque” in nature, because the green leotards that they wore, coupled with fringe skirts, pixie hair cuts and defiant expressions, released them straight from the animated screen to the stage of the Ancient World. Perhaps this was a choice made by the director and the costume designer, because it would provide a more relatable medium for the audience to comprehend. Additionally, the children in the audience were potentially more receptive to a character that they could relate to. The costumes excellently portrayed hatred and anger, even when gentle overtones of class and civility seemed to dominate the persona of the character.

 

The problems at the central core of this play are essential to the majority of Shakespeare’s comedies. In this instance, the problems were unrequited love and the value of misinterpretation. Hermia’s father is about to marry the Queen of the Amazon, but it remains unclear throughout the story whether or not the soon-to-be-queen feels genuine love for the King. Additionally, at the core of the Titania/Oberon marriage is a love triangle that is becoming all-consuming and indicative of the relationship as a whole. That aspect of the play is demonstrating misinterpretation, although the misinterpretation between Oberon and Titania is far less twisted and “screwball comedy-esque” than the misinterpretations experienced between Oberon and Puck. Oberon tells Puck to give the lovers a potion to make them some of them fall in love with each other. However, Puck misinterprets due to the fact that the lovers have changed position, and ends up making some characters love-struck while others remain completely unchanged and sober. When Puck attempts to make amends for the trouble that he has caused, he has a small speech at the end of the play (which was mostly edited out) in which he describes the subtle occurrences in life that make the play a realistic demonstration of all relationships. It is repeatedly mentioned that, while the comedy may seem incredibly far-fetched, it is still a realistic demonstration of the miscommunications that occurred on a regular basis in Shakespearian times due to lack of technology, and still occur today due to variations in word choice, pacing and emphasis.

 

In conclusion, “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”, by William Shakespeare, performed as a ballet at the Kennedy Center demonstrated the values in Shakespearian literature of unrequited love, the hilarity of misinterpretation, and the symbolic meaning behind the various decisions and word choices of actors. The production staff did an exemplary job of highlighting the various symbols of green, and emphasizing the fact that the set was primarily structured around the concept of life beginning anew. The values demonstrated through the use of dance solidified my perception of the play itself, and led me to a more intense level of analysis concerning character development and juxtaposition.

 

 

 

 

linkpost comment

IB Theatre Evaluation #1 [Jan. 9th, 2007|09:23 pm]
        The frantic spontaneity of the theatre provides us with a sense of purpose and an emotional connection to the fast-paced world in which we live. The Arena Stage’s production of “Noises Off” mimicked the production distress of the theatre while symbolically inferring differentiating character personalities through color, light schemes, and interactions with the set. The structural sequence of the play metaphorically represented the very essence of the theatre itself, and served as a greater reminder of the fact that true art is often unfinished, because more beauty can be observed in an open-end than in a closed one. The theme of the production, which could have been interpreted as “things unseen”, served the dual purpose of reminding the audience of the imperfections of a production, even in the most professional atmospheres, and demonstrating the fact that there are a multitude of untold stories lurking behind any surface.

        Blocking, it itself, is a symbol of our greater movements through life. As the director continually corrected the actors in their movements during Act I of “Noises Off”, he was subconsciously informing the audience of the understated imperfections of an unfinished story. For example, the Mrs. Clackett character, a bumbling house maid, was continually unaware of the order in which to remove objects from the living room. This was indicative of the fact that society as a whole is often completely unsure in which order to perform the tasks required to continue basic survival. When Mrs. Clackett forgot the sardines on stage, and eventually ended-up dragging the phone from its jack into a side room, the movement was meant to indicate to the audience that we often leave thing behind or unfinished in our attempts to progress our own life cycles. This relates to the central theme of “Noises Off”, which is Things Unseen, because it is symbolic of inner desires to ignore tasks at hand and focus instead upon the complications of the future and occurring elsewhere. Mrs. Clackett, really named Dotty, was more focused upon her determination to avoid sinking into a state of depression and was anxiously mourning the opening of the play.

        Pantomime was used an incredible amount in the production during Act II. Because there were characters demonstrating the scene on stage, the actors backstage had to use body language in order to completely communicate their proposed solutions to the problems facing the other actors. When the elderly gentleman character, named Selson, or The Burglar, was revealed to be an alcoholic, the rest of the actors rapidly communicated to each other that Selson was in the restroom drinking through a series of tugging motions in the air. Because everything was silent, the audience completely understood the severity of the situation and the desperation conveyed by the acting styles. Art is, essentially, the mimicking of human movement to serve a greater purpose. Thus, theater is the mimicking of human relationships in an attempt to understand them through the progression of controlled and explained representations. “Noises Off” provided an interesting contrast between what was expected and what actually occurred, which is a phenomenon known as ‘irony’. In addition to being ironic, “Noises Off” delved into surface of the production and proved that theatre is not completely focused upon determination to present an entertaining plot line. In the aspect of symbolism, “Noises Off” was a great success.

        Costume changes were also extremely meaningful throughout the performance. When various couples were forced to change costume during compromising situations, they returned in outfits completely related to the motions of their characters. For example, when a female in a couple took off her dress to reveal a black undergarment of sorts, it was revealed in greater detail the fact that the woman’s character was deliberately supposed to be considerably out-of-touch with reality. Because white is the color of life, black can be considered an ethereal color of death, and because the woman was wearing it, she was therefore “out-of-touch” with the environmental workings around her. When the man in the said couple was forced to appear as an Arab Sheik, he was donned in a pink bathroom mat for a headdress. Because pink is considered an extremely feminine color to most of the industrialized world, the color was symbolic of the fact that the man was extremely embarrassed to have been caught with a woman, or embarrassed to have been experiencing femininity. In addition, the man was also swathed in white robes. As the woman was wearing black, the white provided an adequate contrast between the two people, which served to demonstrate the vast differences between them in the first place. Secondly, when the woman in the couple appeared without a terrible amount of clothing on, she was swathed in a black sheet. This had been previously foreshadowed, but further lent proof that her black motif was meant to serve as a demonstration for her personality as a whole. Additionally, black is the color of sin and corruption, which could indicate a lack of superior knowledge regarding the inner-workings of the stage.

        Time is represented in the production through movement of the stage. When the curtain attempts to rise at the beginning of Act III, it gets stuck in the process multiple times. This potentially indicates the fact that time has passed long enough for equipment to deteriorate, as the curtain seemingly rose without incident at the beginning of Act I. Time passing is also indicated through the usage of clothing changes between Act I and Act III. The stage-manager reveals that she is pregnant in Act II, and this is more clearly represented in Act III when she actually begins to show. Though the people look no older, their performances are more perfected between the first and third acts. However, some lines are a bit sketchy, and the rest of the cast frantically attempted to inform the “new cast member” /understudy of his need to pick up his line where he left off. By the end of Act III, it seemed as if all characters had a consideration for the play itself, and were more acutely aware of the fact that the play had to progress, no matter what happened backstage.

        The central problems of the play focused upon relationships. The Burglar was secretly an alcoholic, Dotty was dealing with personal stresses and lack of focus, Vicky was suffering through a form of exhaustive depression, and the director was attempting to hold it all together while assuring his stage manager/girlfriend that their relationship mattered more than his interactions with the rest of the actors combined. An interesting decision was to have the actors have British accents backstage and on stage. Potentially, American accents backstage could have played interestingly into the plot, producing line missteps and confrontations when spoken language arose. This play was probably chosen for production to serve as a timeless reminder to the audience that there are as many struggles backstage as there are on stage. In a time in governmental control where political evidence is being revealed as American prepares to embark upon another election, perhaps it was an adequate time to release a play that would appeal to masses begging to see a representation of the insanities that surround everyone, everywhere, regardless of place or position.

        The quote: “Don’t worry- it’s only a technical!” was frequently repeated through Act I of the production to further the notion that the actors in the play were extremely confused about the direction they were supposed to take. As mentioned previously, the play can be used as a symbol of Things Unseen. Because there were frequent references to the dress rehearsal of the production being a mere technical one, it can be inferred that the technical rehearsal was regarded as less than such. Because the technical rehearsal was regarded as less than it actually was, perhaps the actors have been contributing half-heartedly from the beginning. Perhaps the quote was meant to represent the fact that people, in life, rarely regard important matters, even when they are on an extreme deadline to face them. Because the director in this production was also an actor, it was an extremely interesting choice to have the director move actors around on stage, though his job as director would suggest such tasks. However, because the audience is aware of the fact that the director is as much an actor as the actors themselves, the play can also be used to symbolize the fact that the blind are leading the blind.

        The theme of Things Unseen was manipulated throughout the production to indicate the fact that there are stories erupting in every cavity of life. Costume colors demonstrated the differentiating personalities between characters, and predicted their behavior in acts to come. Actors in the production indicated that they, too, were completely lost in regards to personal matters, and this began to affect their production on stage, which was in itself symbolic of the fact that what remains unseen has severe control over human performance. Undoubtedly, the play was meant to symbolize the fact that the human mind’s capability to remember is both its greatest asset and its weakest link.
linkpost comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]

Advertisement