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.
Sunday, November 29, 2015
Sunday, November 22, 2015
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.
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.
Sunday, November 8, 2015
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)