A community, as explained in the Oxford dictionary is: “a group of people living together in one place, the people of an area or country considered collectively; society. A group of people with a common religion, race, or profession: the scientific community. The holding of certain attitudes and interests in common. A group of interdependent plants or animals growing or living together or occupying a specified habitat.
The transitional process between studio and theatre space seemed to cause a number of physical queries. It also brought to life the world in which we were to coexist as characters and cast members. On the first day of using the Arena Theatre, we could enter the room at the start of the day and use the first fifteen minutes to simply absorb the surroundings; taking note of every minute detail. To explore our physical community space and walk around each environment, walking through the journey of our characters made everything come to life. The woman’s story became easier to visualise as we played through each of the scenes in our minds, silently absorbing the ambience.
The biggest weakness I found was that a number of the cast were confused about where to position themselves; both in the wings and onstage. The space we had become accustomed to was a wider, yet shorter area; this being longer yet narrower. This created confusion in particular when entering the stage and then both of the ensemble pieces. Oddly enough, it seemed that the adjustment to a new performance area appeared to create a lapse in remembering if your character was situated at stage left or stage right. The two ensemble pieces naturally had to be revisited due to the positioning of the cast as a whole. It appeared the cast seemed to work in close proximity and were a little afraid to maximise the potential space. Downstage right became the apparent hub of the community, so we had to walk through the choreography, ensuring that everyone gave each other the safest possible surrounding support but also that the stage in its entirety was explored; in particular, the whole of the upstage area.
Thomas Leabhart, Push Theatre Company philosophies we should be; ‘Actors of presence, actors who did not disappear on such a stage, actors large enough to fill the empty space.’ This can be said of our piece, in the way the cast seemed to want to stay by the audience for, perhaps, fear of not being seen. On the contrary, when I watch a performance I often see through the centralised characters and attempt to seek out other stories and surrounding stories.
Another point I would comment on would be that the moving between one space to another created a few difficulties regarding professionalism. I feel for some people the importance of remaining focused and on target the whole time was not so important. Simple things like disrupting the ambience backstage and in the dressing rooms meant the rest of the cast had to work harder to stay focused. Not to mention, the them of the piece was domestic violence and was essential we delivered it in a way that was true and honest, but very respectful and empathetic to the victims; in particular the 72 women that died as a result of it last year alone and also those suffering daily in silence.
When training as an actor one is taught to always rehearse, revisit and relearn in order to strive for honesty in a performance. Thus, the RSVP model should not only be applicable during the first stages of a production, but continue to be revisited and relearned until the final curtain call.
In 1989, Suzanne Lacy wrote “I never know if a work is “right” until I see it. But along the way to that moment when, well into the middle of a performance or even near the end, I ‘recognise’ the image, there are many decisions in which the shape is created.” So, just as Lacy explained, decisions are constantly needed to be made in order that the piece is representative of the true negotiation between inner and outer reality. The body must be used to mirror emotions and stories. Similarly, the artistic policy for physical theatre company DV8 details;
“...above all, communicating ideas and feelings clearly and unpretentiously...”
When the first dress rehearsal of Four Ways to Speak Out took place on Wednesday the cast were united and excited, the tech run had gone successfully; utilising the time together efficiently, and the set was the empty space in which the story was to unfold. Standing in the wings awaiting my arrival into the space I felt confident and content with the work we had devised this semester. After an extensive character workshop, I felt ready to deliver the woman’s flashbacks. Then something happened.
Onstage I found myself questioning why I wasn’t as engaged as I was during the dress run and why I didn’t feel I was delivering an honest account of the woman’s disappearance. I believe this was a result of a number of factors. Due to the success of the dress run, subconsciously I feel we as a cast; myself included, took for granted the RSVP effect and thought we could aesthetically recreate the previous emotion without returning to the originality of the piece. I allowed myself to engage with fellow cast members in the wings. Although I didn’t hold any conversations, I still became too aware of what the surrounding circumstances were, and found myself in the heart of the disruption, rather than allowing the previous character exercise to find and indeed keep, the woman’s account. Had I have found a quiet corner I could reflect in I think I would have delivered a stronger description for the audience. Stanislavski dedicated his actor training to delivering the truth, and is quoted in An Actor Prepares as saying “It is so much easier to lie when you are on the stage than to speak and act the truth”.
Another factor of my performance was my meticulous attention to detail. Upon reflection, this only led to delivering a “lie”. In the last interactions between Andy and the women, the action created onstage was always unknown and was something the five of us never delivered exactly as the previous performance. This concerned me as I was keen to close the woman’s story with a final reflection of the state at which the relationship had reached. After both of the Wednesday performances Andy and I would take a few minutes out to revisit those interactions; seeking to create something we could ‘nail’ and perfect so it was easier to recreate in the performance. We didn’t do this for the final show however. On Thursday we relaxed, just as the rest of the cast did. We stopped trying to reach a perfect performance and instead concentrated on forgetting. That is, to forget the body and any outside influences , but rather to enjoy the last performance and use it to showcase the work we have become so proud to share with the public. This relaxed atmosphere did not make us complacent (as with the first production) but rather stayed true to the themes and narrative we were to share. By returning to the R stage of the process we could effectively deliver an honest account; something essential to remember when exploring physical theatre.
Bibliography
Anderson, J.(1997) Art Without Boundaries Dance Books Limited
Brook, P.(1968) The Empty Space McGibbon & Kee
Crickmay, C & Tufnall, M (1990) Body Space Image. Dance Books Limited
Keefe, J & S Murray (2007) Physical Theatres: A Critical Introduction London: Routledge
Keefe, J & S Murray (2007) Physical Theatres: A Critical Reader London: Routledge
Stanislavski, K. An Actor Prepares (1980) London:Methuen
Other Sources
www.akramkhancompany.net. Accessed 20/04/10
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/community?view=uk. Accessed 20/04/10
http://www.dv8.co.uk/about_dv8/artistic_policy. Accessed 08/04/10
http://www.pushtheatre.org/philosophy.htm. Accessed 04/04/10
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment