Solo Performance: Theatre Theorist Theory

This past week we talked about the Solo performance, which is the HL product for the IB, and saw the guidelines as well as several theorists examples.

I think that in our entire theatre carreer in Theatre, we have never worked in all of the areas at once, meaning being director, producer, actor, and designer. Although we did cover most of the areas for this year's school play, we weren't techinically directors, so the experience is yet to be known.
This is something that i found very intriguing and rich about the product; all of the other three are based on one or two of the aforementioned aspects, and they try to inmerse you into the role of either of these positions (a director for the DN, an actor for the collaborative, etc.). But this one proyect, let's you experience each of them together at once. It is one thing to experience being a director, actor, producer, or designer one at a time, but it is completely different to experience being all of them at the same time. Now i do think it will be a major challenge, since apart from all the other IB work you have, it is imperative to bend over and backwards to actually comply with each of the requirements by yourself alone.
To me, this idea of experiencing all of them lets you put in perspective what you skills are, and which area is better for you, because you can actually compare them. I mean, you could compare your work as a director in the DN and as an actor in the ensemble, but they are two very different works with very different conditions and limitations. However the Solo joins all aspects together and gives you the opportunity to actually compare and know which is the area you have more skills in.

Now, talking about the theatre theorists, we managed to look at a list of about thirty of them who explored different areas, like voice, body, design, aesthetic training, psycological training, etc. But personally i have come to conclude that i want to research about a theorist that explores physical training and psycological training for the character, because is the aspect i have most training in and probably the one i do best. Now, i have considered researching about a theorists who concentrates in the voice, because it is pretty much the one i have the least training in, and i sing like a dying bird, so it would be very beneficial to get some informal training. But that is exactly the reason why i am not choosing one of these theorists, because i have no training, and doing it by myself informally might not be very succesful. I could do all of the exercises and train myself, but maybe it doesn't quite have the results i was expecting, and my application of them is not very good in the performance. So i don't really want to risk messing up, because, well, training in any area takes years, and i can't turn my horrible voice into Adele's.
As i mentioned, i decided to work with the body and the psycological state of the actor, which i think are the most important areas for the training of a good well-rounded actor. Plus, as i explained, this is the area i have most training so the process will not be as long, and the application will be a lot more succesfull than in other cases.
One of the theorists, and probably the one i will choose, that interest me the most is Stanislavsky. I heard about him a lot of years ago, but it wasn't until last year when i actually got to know who he was, and researched about him. From the very beginning i agreed completly with his theory and thought that his actor training was simply amazing. I really liked how he explored the psycological training, such as experience, that the actor needed to undergo in order to fully portray a role. I think that this is something i really want to explore someday, and probably this is the opportunity for me to do it.
Another theorists i really liked was none other than Stanislavsky's disciple, Eugenio Barba. What i find really interesting about him is his take on Stanislavsky's system and theory, because i find facinating how one theory can be explained and explored by another theorists. Basically, Barba seeks to train the actor in a mental way to a then physical one, which i find intriguing.
Although i said i wanted to work with a theory about the physical and psyocological aspects of the acting, i definitely know i don't want to research on Arteaud or the theorists on miming. As for the latest, i really don't like mimes and i don't find the theory appealing at all. But, as for Arteaud, i did find his theory incredibly facinating and amusing, but i find his work a bit over the edge, in the sense that i find some of his work a bit extreme.
Other theorists i liked where Brecht (as usual) and Berkoff, because of their theory about how acting and theatre it self should be represented, and should represent. However, i think i am definitely working with Stanislavsky.

One thing i noticed about the product, is that it is not only as open (even more) as the other ones, but it has a lot more variety, as in there are very little limitations. The pp, as i mentioned before, has a very short list of possible traditions which are mainly puppetry or Asian and Eurpean tradition. However, the Solo product has no lists for you to choose from, and lets you be as original as possible. I think this helps in the approaches and the ideas we have, making us more suceptible to exploring theatre in a wider spectrum.

Now, my only concern about this product, is the fact that it is only a product. I mean, theorists have developed their theories over the course of decades, so how are we going get through it all in just a short period of time? I know we only have to concentrate on one aspect of the theory, but it still takes a whole lot of time? Will we even be able to go through the entire theory of the aspect? What if i don't finish the theory because it is too complicated? I think the gaps that this products leaves are very frustrating because they limit you to a very small portion of a huge theatre theory.

Staging a Proposal (not very original i know...)

This week we had our proposal contest, for which Giselle's and mine won. We also looked at the future dates for next year, we must brace ourselves, deadlines are coming (well sorta.)

For my proposal, i needed to change several things in order to adapt it for it to be actually stageable, given that we have the best resources on Earth! (mind the sarcasm). I decided to change a bit the lights, and just have the entire stage lit, because there is no way we can arrange for them to direct into the circular stage, and then be rearranged for Giselle's proposal. So for now, because we still have to try out things, i will most likely just light the stage with a regular light bulb, and then when the part of the full lighting comes, i will just turn on the entire stage, without keeping the focus on the circle.
Now, the most important change i had to do, is the PG-13 thing. I cant have an actress (who is a minor by the way) naked on stage because of obvious reasons, so instead, i decided to strip her up to her undergarments. In a way, I'm still sticking to my concept and vision, because she is still taking off her dress of lies, and is revealing her true self. I think that in a way, it is fine to keep a little clothing because Blanche is still hiding some of the major truths, such as the prostitution and the illegal relationships she was having. So after all, this decision does not alter or interrupt my concept or vision, so i can keep on working towards that.
For this staging i was crystal clear on how i wanted my actress to be. I wanted someone with a powerful voice, someone that has a lot of skills with her voice and intentions, and is able to recite a long monologue without boring people. This is because there aren't a lot of actions in my proposal, and i need the actress to be able to transmit all of these painful emotions through her voice more than her body. Still, i want the physicality, and acting as a whole, to be extremely realistic (naturalistic if you will), without the usual crying in the floor Hamlet sort of thing. I want her body to transmit the pain of taking off the clothes/lies, and revealing her true self. Moreover, i need an actress with a powerful energy, that can be blasted into the audience with a single movement. Now i know it sounds very weird, but the character's energy must be felt by the audience, in the sense that they must feel her pain.
That is why i chose, Siu. Because, as abstract as it may sound, i believe she has a very good control of energy, in the sense that she can impact the audience with a few movements, which is exactly what i'm looking for. However, even though her voice skills are very good, i think i need to focus more on her intentions to get exactly where i want to.
As for Mitch, even though there was no way Daniel wasn't going to play him, he fits perfectly into what i'm looking for. The character has literally one line, but it's a very powerful and influential one, because it marks the spot where someone tries to approach a fully vulnerable Blanche, and thus she conceals again. So i wanted an actor who had very good vocal skills, like Daniel. Also, i wanted someone with a lot of stage presence, which i think Daniel has, because the character is standing at the back without doing anything, making him almost invisible. Yet i want his presence to be felt, because he represents that link between Blanche's reality and fantasy.

Something that really intrigued me and left me thinking a lot, was something two of the actors said. They mentioned that they wanted to work with me because i was very harsh and was not afraid to tell them they were doing things wrong, and pushing them. Now i think it is sort of true, in the sense that i am very straightforward. But maybe is not a good thing when it comes to your relationship with the actors, because they might eventually hate me because i'm too harsh on them. I don't really care if they hate me or not (i have no emotions), but i think that is something that can clearly mess up the director-actor dynamic, influencing on the final work. And i believe it is imperative that they form a strong relationship to able to work together; for the actor to understand what the director is saying, and for the director to further analyze strength and difficulties in the actor. If i don't achieve this (not the case), then maybe i will be missing out on several things, and the final product will not be as good as is should.
However, i still think it is important to have this trait they mentioned, to push forward and not give up just because it looks "fine", because you seek for it to be genuinely perfect. I do think i always look for this, and i am not content with a mediocre or average work. So i think it is important that a director is looking to push his actors, and not mind the "i don't want to be mean" part.

On another note, Giselle wanted me (and i accepted) to be Stanley in her proposal. She said she was looking for an actor who could transform into not only the character, but also the body into a surreal figure to convey emotions. I think her proposal is amazing, and even if she has to change a lot of things for it to be doable in our beautifully equipped stage, it will be a great performance.
My concern is that i'm not very good at learning lines, specially when it comes to a one on one conversation, as there are no other actors to give me cues. It happened to me a few years back, because i didn't even move in the stage, so it all came down to learning a bunch of lines. That is definitely an area for improvement.
My other concern is time. We have literally two weeks to stage it, and i have to work on both proposals at the same time, not to mention my other subjects' deadlines and obligations. Originally, i voted for us not to stage anything, because i felt that we wouldn't make it, and i didn't want to present a random piece of acting, with a lot of mistakes and errors. But apparently, my team is extremely confident about it, and they are willing to work a lot, which i think is amazing and very useful. I am trusting them on this one. And i think this is very important when it comes to directing, obviously there is always a pessimist (im a realist ok?), who will say they won't make it. So it comes down to the positive thoughts, the hard work, and the team work and dynamic to get through it and actually achieve the final goal, in our case, the staging of two proposals.

The day of the staging, i want the audience to leave commenting about our skills and how awesome we are. I don't mean to sound arrogant, but it will be nice to hear i did a good job in theatre one last time at school.

Surviving the IB products

This week, after handing in the first draft of the Director's Notebook, we began to talk about the other IB products, specifically the Presentation, as well as visiting our library to begin our search for plays to work with for the real DN.

For the sake of this blog let's assume I am staying for the second year, OK? Good.

Although our theatre library is not incredibly extensive, there is a lot of interesting materials to pick from. Personally, i think it is important to explore all of the possible options (that strike your attention obviously), before picking out which play to use for the actual products. I've only read one play that i chose picked out, and although i really liked the play, and found it amusing, i am certain that i do not want to use it for the real DN, which supports my view on choosing the first play you read and liked. I think that, even if the first one is amazing, you should be open to reading other material, which is something i will do, because i want to find the right play to use. For me, i want a play with very few stage directions, because i want to let my imagination and artistic ideas take over the actions of the play, as well as having lots of dialogues (specially monologues), for me to work with. This was the problem with the play i read, it had not many but millions of stage directions, and it sort of narrowed my ideas for production. Moreover, i think it is essential to have this extensive searching process, to find the best play that suits them. This is because, as a theatre maker, one must be open to any sort of material, but must be willing to work with it, thus, a play you picked out at random to work with, might limit your artistic responses and willingness to work with it. Additionally, even if you do find the play you like at first, i think it is pretty useful to read other plays, because you can draw some creative ideas from them to later use them on the play you chose.
I've also picked out a book about Stanislavsky and his method, because i am certain i want to work with his method for my solo performance product. Now, it may seem contradictory to what i said earlier about reading a range of material and then pick one out, but this is different. I've always been super interested in him and his method, and i really feel the need to work with it, because i consider his method simply astonishing. But this doesn't mean i am not open to working with other practicioners, it just means i have a certain preference, and for now i have my mind set on it.
The third book i picked, although i haven't read it yet, was a directing book. The first time i encountered the book was five years ago, when Roberto gave it to Mauricio Jordan to prepare to direct the following year's play, and it struck my interest. Now it is my turn to read it, and i expect for it to be incredibly useful for next year's play, the DN, and even college. I've come to realize i might be a better director/producer than actor, and i really want to read this book to get a better insight into the job a director has to take upon himself, because i've never really taken the role on a serious note. As for now, i think it will help me gain new skills to apply to the DN, in the sense that i will be able to make better directorial decisions, and maybe i'll improve in creating and applying the concept to the entire play. Then, i will be able to apply these skills practically in the school play, and who knows, maybe they will come in handy. So i'm really looking forward to that.

As for the PP product, i have come to find it quite interesting, yet very limited. We read the rubric, and saw one (should've been two, but you know the school's internet) example of the product, and although i like the idea of working with a world theatre tradition, i didn't like the options the IB gave. I think the list is too centered on Asian traditions, and most of them are puppet theatres, which limits the options of different tradition (if you're reading this Mr. IB, please make a longer list). Nonetheless, i find this a very relatabe project, in the sense that we've worked with a different world theatre tradition every year on the school play, making my knowledge on them a bit bigger. Moreover, the fact that we worked with Kathakali this year (which is also on the list), helped us have a great insight into the amount of research and investigation we have to apply to it. And i've come to realize that the products have certain similarities in terms of skills. In the DN, we had to investigate the context (inner and outer) of the play and the author, and now for the PP, we have to do the same but for an entire tradition. So i think our skills have had a great improvement over the year, that will definitely come in handy. Also, i think that it can help in the DN, because maybe i can apply some of the conventions, or even the tradition as a whole to the play i pick, just like the Bunraku puppets in the example.
As a theatre maker, i think it is important to have a lot of knowledge on theatre traditions, not only genres, because it gives you a wider view for explorations. Maybe you want to stage a play that has a lot of potential to do it in an specific theatre tradition, like a play where Rakugo theatre would make it best, who knows? Or maybe, you want to do a groundbreaking play, and you can use several conventions from different traditions, that apply perfectly with the play. I think knowing about them is incredibly useful to generating better creative decisions for a play, as well as analyzing them.

All in all, the products will be our doom.

Two moments, one play

This past week we had the first part of our dramaturgy workshop, and then we worked full on nerd mode on the director's notebook. On another note, i think my brain also died this week, thank you IB!

Now that my concept is fully shaped and i have my vision clear, i think i can now continue with my work properly. Essentially i resolved on working with how we build lies in order to cover the ugliness of reality, to escape it and embellish it. And i think this all came from the fact that the play explores essentially this topic through Blanche's struggle with society.

My vision especifically centers on one thing only: for the audience to see the play through Blanche's eyes, her perspective of things. I want the audience to experience the entire play and the actions just like Blanche did, and then generate a sort of catharsis.
For example, i've decided to start the play (even though this is NOT one of my two moments), with lots of sound and conversations and sequences around the stage and in the entire theatre complex, in order to set the context of New Orleans, but using all of these elements to the extent that it becomes overwhelming to the audience, just like it happened with Blanche. I think that from the begining i want to establish this sort of relation ship with the audience.
Another moment for example is when Blanche sees Mitch for the first time. I personally believe she was indeed attracted to him, so i want to cut anytype of sound and movement in the stage and she is the only one that can move, admiring him, for a few seconds, and then continue as if nothing happened. It would create the effect of attraction, and even love
I even sort of intend to heat up the theatre itself when Blanche talks about how hot and sticky everything is, for the audience to actually see things the same way, and well set the literal atmosphere.

As for the stage, at first i thought about doing an in the round play in an amphitheater, because i wanted the audience to look down on the characters, symbolizing society judging their actions. But then i found two problems with that: one, that all the exits and enters of characters, aswell as the stage division of the room would make things a bit awkward and difficult. And second, and most importantly, that it doesn't quite fit my vision, if the audience is sort of looking down on them, then they are not experiencing things like them (kind of confusing i know). So i designed a different stage. Basically it is just a normal looking stage, but it has an extension in the middle that crosses the audience, and leads to a circle (i guess we can call it that), surrounded by the audience, that stands on a lower level (about 1 m). So i want to have all the moments of great tension, like the monologue, the mailman's kiss, the poker game, etc. in this place, in order to create the effect of the audience looking down on them.
On the topic of design elements, i intend to use very flashy and bright colors for the entire. This is because this type of colors usually give a sense of dreaming or fantasy, which is exactly what happens with lies. They look so bright and pretty, in order to hide something really cruel and ugly: reality. I haven't really desinged fully how i want the costumes to look, but i want to strictly stick with the 1950's style, and i want to make the evident contrast between Blanche's attire and the others'. I also want to have a constant change of attires, and characters putting on clothes as they lie, and taking them off as they reveal something true.

Now talking about my moments, i want to stage Blanche's monologue about Allan, because it is the best example of my concept. Literally, Blanche is taking her lies apart and being fully honest, like if she is undressing herself. Thus, i want her to actually undress herself, fully naked, to symbolize her taking away all of the lies that cover her, her reality. It fits perfectly, since the "dress of lies" is physically present in the scene, and she takes it off as she reveals the truth. I also plan on staging it on the circle of the extension, to have the audience look down on her, because she ultimately created these lies to avoid being in the position where society looks down and judges her, which is happening right now. I also want to light the entire stage (the circle), for her to be fully visible by everyone, and only focus her by turning the lights off the other parts of the stage. I think that the shock of seeing an actress get naked on stage, impacts the audience a lot, to the extent that it could connect empathecally in sense of how shocking it is to tell the truth. I've been considering lighting the audience too, but i think it would be distracting from Blanche's nakedness and her monologue.
As for the second moment, i plan to do the part before the rape, where Stanley attacks verbally Blanche with the truths he knows about her, telling her what that he told the truth to Mitch. At first i had a different approach, but it didn't quite suit my concept. So now i plan on Stanley taking off parts of Blanche clothes, which symbolize her lies, and then she tries to put them back on but fails to do so, because reality is catching up to her. I'm still developing my ideas on this, and i haven't truly figured out how to make the audience feel Blanche's fear first hand.

Mainly, what i've managed to learn this week is how to work like a real director. Previously, my work with the DN was based on researching and deciding what i want to do, coming up with all of these cool ideas to use. Now that i am past that, my job has become to evaluate each idea, scratch, re-imagine, sketch, and so on and so forth and what have you. I think that it is important to stick to the concept and vision, and always check your ideas with them, like the in the round amphitheatre style stage i planned to do, i had to scratch that idea because it didn't quite fit what i wanted to do. I even had to change my initial idea for the second moment of the people carrying Blanche throught he stage, to Stanley forcing Blanche's clothes out.
So my main inquiry of the week is how to connect the vision and the concept into my second moment. How does a director actually manage to do it for every scene? Does it have to happen for every single one of them? What if a scene is just pure absurdity and there is no way to add it?

Concept and Vision

This past week i've been working on my Director's Notebook, completing the drafted version of the first two parts. I've managed to come up with lots of ideas for my vision, and i've finally decided on a concept: "Lies are a handmade dress to keep us safely covered from the cruel reality".

Personally i feel quite confident on how my work is turning out, yet i'm not sure how will i ever manage to finish it in time. I think that there's so much to write, and i have so many ideas, but i'm not sure how or when will i include them all into it.
Something that has been bothering me is the fact that i have literally millions of ideas for both scenes, and even for the entire play as a whole, and as much as i would like to include them all, it's pretty much impossible. I mean, i've had trouble on focusing a main vision, because of all the new cool ideas that i come up with. So i'm constantly struggling with focusing my ideas and scratching the ones that won't work, because i really have a lot of expectations. The good thing though, is that the work is never truly staged (except for our sampling of it), so it gives lots of space for me to actually include the craziest and coolest ideas for my vision, because it will never be physically done, and no one will have to pay for it (relaz cino...).
In terms of my concept, i found it pretty easy to come up with. From the beginning i perceived the play as a game of lies, and a struggle with reality, so i already knew what i wanted to say with this play. The hard part for me was actually phrasing it, because i sometimes want it to sound poetic, but it's supposed to be as simple as possible.
Now that i do have a concretely phrased concept, i'm confident i can move on with my work, and i can focus more my ideas directed towards it.

Something realli important i learned is that you always need to think about what you want your audience to feel, and later talk about over coffee after the play. Like Brecht himself proposed: the audience must feel a sort of catharsis through the self reflection of the actions in the play. And that's pretty much where i want to get. I want my audience to experience the play in Blanche's shoes, giving them the experience of social injustice and insanity. It is important for a theatre maker to think about this as a starting point, specially if he doens't have a fully fleshed concept at hand. I think it helps a lot to narrow down, until you actually get to phrase it. Plus, it also helps you focus on your vision to use the best ideas that fit both of these thoughts.
I think that putting yourself in the audience's perspective helps a lot when it comes to your intended impact on the audience and concept. It pretty much helps you identify and evaluate your concept and vision and whether it works or not. Maybe you had a lot of cool ideas, but if you see it from the audience's point of view, they have nothing to do with your concept, and they don't create the effect that you wanted. In my case, i'm still drafting my ideas, though i'm pretty close to a concrete scene, so i can't evaluate like that yet. But in the case of my vision, i can do this to see if my ideas are too crazy and unrelated, or if they do achieve what i want.
As i mentioned before, my concept is about lies covering up reality, and i chose it because i wanted to talk about Blanche's constant lying in order to walk away from the truth and reality for what it truly is. And i think most people do it, and so we make our own pretty lies and fantasies that cover up what we don't want to see or hear from reality. So i wanted the audience to reflect upon the lies we tell and create ourselves in order to escape the cruelty of our own reality. And thus comes my vision of the audience looking at the play through Blanche's perspective, experiencing everything like her. And as a theatre maker/producer/director, i must make sure to use every possible element to achieve them. For example i will use annoying sounds to begin the play, so the audience feels as stranged as Blanche felt when she got to Elysian Fields. It is important for a director to take notes on the most minimal details to reach his objective. To always be sure that things have a purpose in the scene, rather than just filling it up. Obviously, he needs to direct everything towards his vision and concept in order to reach the effect he wants.
But something i have been wondering about is how director's manage to translate the playwright's meaning into the concept? I mean, the director obviously has a concept that matches the play, but many elements the playwright included may affect negatively the director's vision. Should he take them out? Wouldn't it loose a bit of meaning? What if i changed the cue for the Varsouivianna to enter? Would it change Williams' effect?

Week off, work on

This past week during the school break, i worked on my Director's notebook portfolio in all of its aspects. I also got to see a play in NYC and managed to visit actual theatre facilities at a university (with actual lights and real floors).

This is really frustrating... i have a massive writer's block, and i really don't feel like working on 20 pages of pure work. But being all serious and honest, i think this is a great challenge we have taken. Writing an essay is one thing, but developing a portfolio is something else entirely. I sometimes feel like giving up and just handing in whatever i have, but i guess i just have to man up and keep on going.
So far, i'm pretty confident about my job, i think i have produced a fair amount of work, and i did manage to do develop more throughout the break. I still feel like I'm missing something, like my portfolio could be better, or even that it is not of a good enough standard.
What really bothers me is the fact that I'm used to working with a very structured scheme, and i thought the DN had a very defined and structured one. But it turns out that it is incredibly flexible, and i don't like that. Each of the three examples i read were entirely different from one another, and they all followed their own structure. I got to the conclusion that it was pretty much just having all the information needed, without any clear structure whatsoever. I'm not very fond of this, because it makes things very ambigious, and it becomes harder for me to actually lay out all of my ideas.
As of now i've already planned one of my scenes, and have lots of recorded ideas of the third part in my journal. I literally spent a day sketching the stage and some of the costumes. It's really fun actually, and i like the fact that i can let my imagination free. What i don't like is that the second part is very confusing, and none of the examples show either a pattern or what i thought was supposed to be done in that part. So i guess i'll just carry on with what i'm doing.

Something i've learned in further detail is organizing myself. Having two essays and a portfolio for the IB is not an easy task, so i guess i've been improving my organization skills. And i think this is really important not only to complete the work on time for the deadlines, but also to reduce the stress and the pressure. I believe that this skill is useful in the school, life, and even as a theatre maker. Obviously a director has deadlines to complete his work, and obviously creating an entire play takes a lot of time, and thus a lot of organization, for him to be prepared and follow a schedule. I think that i can relate this a lot to the work producing the school play, because we had to organize our works to deal with everything on time.
And i'm not only talking about organization in terms of work, i'm also talking about organizing and setting ideas. Obviously a creative process requires creativity (duh.), and sometimes your imagination flies away and you come up with all these really cool and wonderful ideas to include. But maybe they don't all match, or maybe you think of it in the shower, and then forget. So something i've learned is to keep track of my ideas that come up randomly, and writte them down to remember them. Even so, when i was visiting the drama school, tons of ideas flowed through my mind, so i started to write words on my phone to remember them later. I think this is something that happens not only to directors, but also to writers, producers, designers, etc. They can draw ideas from very simple things, and i think is important to organize them and keep track of them. Maybe some ideas work, maybe they others don't, but who knows they might come up useful anytime soon. I've heard of directors who discart ideas for one play, but then use it for another, and i think that i something i could do with the ideas i don't use for one of the scenes, and use it in the next.
And i think something really interesting, and a technique i find very useful, is to draw the images that come up in your mind. I think that as a director reading a play for the first time, it is useful to draw the characters, some of the important objects described in the play, the setting, etc. to get a physical picture of your vision, and what you want to achieve. I recon it helps to make your vision clearer and actually approachable to evaluate if it can be done, or if it works and matches with the play. I believe that as a theatre maker, someone who works with visual performances, it becomes better to record the images in your mind than just recording the sole reactions.
Speaking of which, i've had a hard time putting my ideas together, because there are so many and they don't all match together. So i've been improving my judging skills on the ideas, supported by the organization skills to put them in the most logical order, and then evaluating to see what could be useful and what is just garbagge.
Something i've noticed, is that a director is always looking for new inspirations, new ideas, new things to try. Before, when we watched plays, i was only looking at the aspects as a student, to later analyze in the play review. But now that i'm working on being a director myself, when i watched the play in NYC, i was noticing more the ideas that could apply to my own play. I've been reflecting on how directors do this, and i think this is why the DN asks us to compare and relate to previous theatre experiences. They want us to dig the ideas from things that actually existed and we have seen. And now that i watched a play with that in mind, all i could think was "maybe i could use the light in a similar way". And probably that's what directors do in real life, they look and evaluate to inspire themselves.
What i still struggle to understand, is how do directors take the vision and make it real? Now i know the DN is not going to happen, but i've been wondering about it. How do they manage to bring all of those processed ideas onto the stage? I remember how we did it in the school play, and it was not an easy job. But we had standards and limitations to follow, so we knew exactly when we were going off chances. However, how do directors know that? The budget? If so, when they know they won't have the money and decide to go another direction, wouldn't that take something off their vision? Could it make a huge difference? And how do they manage to transmit their ideas to the designers, artists, and builders? I mean, a picture in your head is not the same in someone else's head (this is why TOK is useful). And what happens if he has so many ideas he looses track of his initial vision and concept?

Alice

"It's no use going back to yesterday, because i was a different person then"- Lewis Carroll
Alicia is a ballet performance based on Lewis Carroll's famous novel Alice in Wonderland, choreographed by Humberto Canessa and directed by Pepe Corzo. Presented in El Gran Teatro Nacional, the play portrays the story of Alice, whose innocent behaviour leads her to an amazing encounter with Wonderland. Being this a ballet performance, rather than an acted play, dance takes upon the main role to portray an unspoken story. Next year's school play will be our own adaptation of Alice in Wonderland, so i believe having watch a professional performance was very useful to inspire ourselves in order to draft ideas for next year.

The play was divided into two acts, with five to six scenes per act. Although i haven't read the novel itself, i think that the way they handled the story was good enough, cutting the first act with Alice's first encounter with the Red queen, so I think that we could use a very similar structure for next year. However there are two things i would change and think are essential for our adaptation. I believe that the first act should end with a sort of cliff hanger, and a rising action that catches the audience more, something i felt that the play didn't achieve at the end of their first act. Another thing is that i believe that the Mad Hatter should make an appearance during the first act, because i think he is one of the most dynamic and interesting characters, in fact he is the most iconic of the play. So i think that unlike the ballet, should we include the Hatter in at least one scene of act one, the play would gain a very interesting character to play with. Nonetheless, i find it very useful to use their structure as a guideline for ours.
One thing I strongly believe is that we should not follow the same story as the ballet and the first novel. I think that the second novel, Through the looking glass has a lot of interesting characters and ideas presented, that i think are worth using. Besides, i find it rather odd if we follow the same old Disney sort of thing.
Something that i really like, and i think could work beautifully for next year's play, was how they begun the play. Alice was sitting alone on the stage and a clock was ticking, for which she was solely illuminated forming a sort of circle and casting a shadow on the screen opposite of her. I think that it would be interesting to start our own play in a very similar way, having Alice sitting on the stage alone playing with her doll, whilst the sound of the clock ticks loudly. However i believe that unlike the ballet, we shouldn't include an actual visual of a clock at the back because it takes away a bit of the mystery, as well as not using the screen that splits the stage into two, for obvious reasons. The use of the light in this sequence was very interesting as it drew the focus onto Alice and her movements, which i think we should do equally.
I think another very interesting scene was how they did Alice's fall through the rabbit hole, which i was already wondering how they would do it. They used several dancers dressed with patterns, who carried Alice and did a sort of dance/movement sequence that portrayed the fall. I think that we will not be able to do something similar as it seems a bit confusing and difficult (our actors are not that strong please...). So i think the most reasonable thing to do is to have Alice fall through the trapdoor (no pun intended). Yet i think we could do a very interesting sequence with the lights in a similar way they did. As well as using the real life character, just like they did, to stand around and act as memories or "ghosts".

As mentioned before, i think one of the most interesting and iconic characters of the play is the Mad Hatter, and i felt a bit disappointed on how they handled his character, because it only appeared at the very end, and had a minimum role that did not stand out as much. I think we could use in more interesting ways, and give him a rather bigger role. Something i found interesting is that there was a second level just after the main stage, and during the entire play, no character used it to dance, as there was more than sufficient space in the main stage, However, during Alice's meeting with the Hatter, both character's do cross to the extension and begin to dance, as if they entered a different dimension. I think we could do something very similar in the sense that the Hatter should be able to further connect or approach the audience, as part of his characterization. Speaking of which, i think the character lacked a lot of physicality to characterize his craziness, after all he is mad. So i believe we need to work on having a good portrayal of this character.
One of the character's that intrigued me the most was the worm guy (worm dude), because regardless of the fact that he was the best dancer (in my opinion), i think the way they portrayed him was incredibly interesting. They used various dancers that would sometimes attach to the main dancer, and make the movements like an actual worm. I think we could have the worm be a portrayed by three or even four actors, that work together to portray the movement and the body of the worm. I think his physicality full of curvy movements was very accurate to the insect, and i think we should aim to do something similar.
One character i enjoyed, yet wasn't very amused by, was the Red Queen. I think that the characterization was very interesting, portraying a failed dancer of some sort, and a burlesque character. However i think we shouldn't portray the character as skinny as she was on the ballet, because it takes away a bit of Carroll's description, and i believe it gives a further sense of ridicule. Still, i think that just as the ballet, the Red Queen should be the comic relieve, in the sense that the audience should make fun of her.
I believe that one of the best characterizations was that of the rabbit, who had very nervous and rapid body movements, as well as androgynous movements. I think that we could take inspiration on this portrayal, as it fully shows the character's intentions and ideology that Carroll explains in his book. I think we could even take inspiration on some of his dance moves, to give a further insight into the character's rabbit side. Yet i believe it is necessary for the character to have a big pocket watch, rather than a wrist one like the one they used in the ballet.

In terms of the costumes, i think they were amazing, and managed to show the impressive and crazy side of Wonderland, as well as the down to earth side of the real world. I think we could take mimic the designs of the human characters, although i think we could use dull and lifeless colors, rather than the vivid ones they used on the ballet, as it would show the dullness of reality and further contrast with Wonderland. Likewise, i think that the colors we use for Wonderland and its characters should be very vivid and lively.
The one costume i really hated was that of the Cat. I think the use of foam tubes was very interesting, but it did not reach the same standard as the other costumes. I believer we should not design something similar, and should seek to do the opposite.
I think that Alice's costumes was very dull and simple, and would have like to see something more interesting or lively. I think that we should go a different path and do something different to the ballet and the movie, yet keeping the blue color (i like blue). Still i believe we should have a costume in between the livelihood of Wonderland and the deadness of the real world. I though the contrast of the blue and the pink from the skirt did not work, and just made the character very childish.
I really liked the design of the rabbit, and i think we should keep the vest type of costume, and the white colors, as well as the ears. Yet i think that we shouldn't use the black patterns, as i thought that they made the rabbit look like a cow instead,
Although i think that the worm's costume was rather simple for the dancer to move, i think that we should do something much bigger and greater. Using make up and some patterns, like the one his costume had, we could create a very lively worm.
As i said before, i think that the slim and cartoony costume the Red Queen wore was not very amusing, and did not fully evoke the character's burlesque ideology. So i think that we could work by taking inspiration from Elizabethan and Victorian dresses, and using them with lively red patterns, making her more visually intriguing for the audience.
I think we could work with distorted versions of the old fashionable dresses, when it comes to the designs of the courtmembers and such. I think we could create a very lively and interesting image with all these distorted and visual costumes alongiside exaggerated make ups, that evoke a sense of satire to the scene.

I think that the visual effects of the ballet were incredibly interesting, specially the one with the box when Alice grew big. Still i don't think they will work for us, and we shouldn't realu any of those ideas. Also, we don't have the technology or the money to do those sort of things...

There wasn't really a lot of scenery on stage, as the characters needed enough space to dance. During the scenes in the real world, they used trees, and we shouldn't really use that, yet we could set a very mundane or common stage, with dull colors, to portray reality.
However, i found incredibly cool the use of strage shapes and patterns during the fall and other scenes of distortion, which undoubtly gave a visual performance of fantasy. I think we could inspire ourselves in using distorted scenery, where usual objects have funny shapes and such, in order to show the fantasy of Wonderland.
The same goes with the lights, they obviously have a lot more lighting equipment at their disposal, and are able to create further effects, unlike us. Yet we could use the same ideas of the combination of unusual colors to light the stage duing Wonderland.

I'm really excited for next year, and i think that watching the ballet was really worthy, as we were able to start visualizing what we want to do in the future. Brace yourself Alice.