A number of common themes and issues emerged through the basic fabric of the piece as the creative process turned from the Validation stage to the Performance stage of Robert Le Pages RSVP devising Model. The overriding key theme of domestic violence prevailed, we explored the full meaning of domestic violence; be it “psychological, physical, sexual or emotional” (www.homeoffice.gov.uk). Along with a whole host of feelings and emotions; including blame, fear, love, anger, guilt, manipulation, power, control, desperation and hope.
The ensemble were initially led and manipulated by an attraction towards Andy and the desire to impress themselves upon him. Through Andy’s manipulation of the ensemble the community were drawn together with the exception of myself. I remained removed from the group, until I was singled out with the point gesture and blamed for the woman’s disappearance. The physical and emotional power of the collective ensemble blaming and suspecting me led me to join the community in their sense of upset, confusion and despair for the missing woman, eager to dissipate any blame for the disappearance.
As the performance progressed the ensemble were clearly led by a sense of collective guilt, the shared experience of diary flashbacks ensured the group could hear and begin to understand the pain and suffering the missing woman went through whilst they were oblivious to it all. For example the rape scene within the pub toilets was graphic, sadistic and a demonstration of the cruel reality, whilst at the same time the missing woman’s friends embarked upon the nonsensical and comedy like attempt to apply makeup on her oblivious to the rape and her inner torment.
The collective guilt was further built upon and expanded in relation to Andy, the initial collective group emotions of despair, worry and anguish soon fermented into an atmosphere of anger, open hostility, aggression and fear. The most obvious example for my character came when I fought and grappled with Andy to remove the suitcase. The suitcase had for my character come to represent the missing woman, as it was the only tangible part of her visible to the audience and cast alike. I wanted to rescue it and remove it (her) from the aggressive perpetrator whilst he resisted in a vain attempt not to lose all sign, sound and smell of the person he perversely loved.
The revelations within the diaries of why the woman had disappeared culminated in the community’s rejection of Andy from the fold; the choreography embodied the community’s inner emotions as the ensemble dash about the stage desperate to avoid all physical contact with him. The elements of rejection I initially felt when blame had been levelled at me were built upon successfully, however this time round the blame was based upon fact and not assumption. This heightened the atmosphere and negative emotions of abhorrence, rage and fear the community collectively showed towards Andy as the villain.
It was clear that each member of the ensemble felt a whole array of emotions towards the missing woman, myself and Andy throughout the performance as shown by individual and collective interactions and physical gestures.
The transition from the studio into the theatre space brought about a number of challenges and problems, however this was almost to be expected, as the group had become as Callery aptly states “connected to the space they occupy” (Callery, 2006, Pg 84). We as a group were faced with a change to the environment within which the piece had been created and developed over several months. The most obvious problem the cast had to try and overcome was the size of the stage, as it was far smaller and narrower than the studio. This meant each cast member had to try and perfect their performance, familiarise themselves with one another’s performance, the stage and the stage props very quickly. Confusion and chaos had to be overcome to enable subtle changes to be made to spacing of sections such as the bedroom and bar to ensure the performance was not compromised. For example a scene around the bar had to be cut owing to the smaller than envisaged size of the bar and the impracticalities its size would have meant for the group members. Again, the scene during the second half of the performance when the cast desperately tried to avoid Andy had to be reworked to ensure the pivotal characters were in place whilst ensuring the remaining cast were not just concentrated at the centre of the stage but also occupying the outside edge of the stage. This was also true of the stage props and lighting, we had to consider and revise where the props and lighting should be placed in relation to the characters and action, to ensure they did not dominate or create obstacles, but rather accentuate the performance. My experiences of the transition from the studio to the theatre space is aptly compounded by Oddey who states “The fine tuning of all performance elements did not happen until the dress rehearsal stage and run of performances” (Oddey, 1996, Pg128).
The use of the stage enabled the characters and journey to become real, the close proximity of the group members, stage workings, props and audience gave birth to Four Ways to Speak Out. In order to mitigate the upheaval felt by the group upon leaving the studio and entering the stage we carried out a warm up exercise to help individuals to relax and to cultivate bonding amongst the group. Again, we underwent a character warm up exercise, this ensured close contact with other characters, an awareness of timing, the stage environment, but above all it lead to the metamorphosis of our characters and their emotions.
These were real strengths of the change from studio to theatre as they heightened individual and groups sentiments, emotions and attachment to the stage. The sense of reality and connection came with the rape scene for example, the profound emotional effects it had upon cast members and audience alike had not been experienced in the studio environment. It served to sharpen each and every character and really helped me to affirm my anger, hostility and anger towards Andy. I could and did feel and engage with Callery when she states ““Physical theatre is theatre where the primary means of creation occurs through the body rather than through the mind.” (Callery, 2001, Pg4) My body was overcome with raw emotion, which together with the impulses emitted and absorbed from other characters fuelled my body movements and thoughts on stage.
I feel my character did not engage in the first performance as successfully as I did in subsequent performances. I found my character confused due to a number of factors, I knew from the research stage how I should have been feeling but my lack of passion and emotions towards the missing woman and community left me feeling more like an audience member rather than part of a collective group. My failure to completely engage in the warm up exercise reduced my concentration and ability to connect and absorb other member’s emotional impulses. Further to this Andy’s failure to adhere to the prescribed duo movement compounded my sense of confusion and my ability to engage.
However, during the second and third performances the warm up exercises provided me with a sound basis to emit anxiety and frustration. My character awakened within the community, absorbing, connecting and transmitting impulses to other group members. My whole persona embodied a man tormented by jealously, love, desire and the need for revenge. I felt adrenaline rushing within the pit of my stomach as I clenched my fists and ground my teeth in anger and frustration at the thought of what Andy had done to the missing woman. I even progressed to punch the wall in a display of masculinity, torn at my inability to exact some pain and suffering upon the man who had succeeded in winning the love of the woman I had often fantasised about. The anger and rage was shadowed by an inner felt guilt of what if; what if I had tried harder to win the affections of the missing woman she would have never had to endure the domestic violence and would still be here within the community.
The second performance really led me to understand my character, I truly reacted to the impulses I felt within and around me, I sub-consciously reacted and lost all inhibitions as opposed to my earlier performance whereby I felt very conscious of each and every movement made.
It was evident the quality of the performance improved with each successive piece. I feel this was due to the group collectively growing and adapting to improvements and suggestions made, as Mackey notes “The continual evolution intrinsic to such a process allows the piece to be ‘living’ theatre... it can constantly change, even during its performance run” (Mackey, 1997, Pg113).
Finally, it is quite clear that Lepage’s RSVP model continued to apply even at the final stages of the performance as I and other group members analysed the performance in an attempt to continually improve. The passionate individual and collective representations looked to convey the message of domestic violence through various movements and gesture that were both fluid and open to interpretation. As Dundjerović suggests “’P’erformance as a final part of the RSVP cycles, [is] not necessarily a finalized and fixed performance as expected in professional theatre; on the contrary the performance structure remains fluid and open to further change” (Dundjerović, 2009 Pg30).
Bibliography
Callery, D. (2006) Through the body, a practical guide to physical theatre. London-UK Routledge.
Dundjerović, A. (2009) Routledge Performance Practitioners: Robert Lepage. Oxon. Routledge.
Mackey, S. (1997) Practical theatre, a post-16 approach. Stanley Thornes Publishers.
Murray and Keefe. (2007) Physical Theatres, an introduction. London. Routledge.
Oddey, A. (1996) Devising Theatre: A Practical and Theoretical Handbook. Abingdon – UK Routledge.
Secondary Source:
Available at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk
Tuesday, 27 April 2010
Monday, 26 April 2010
Blog 3 Haylee Blackwell
1) One of the main issues was the portrayal of domestic violence; stimulated by the pictures we were shown. The pictures were disturbing and as a group we felt uncomfortable and vulnerable from that point. Dundjerovic states, “…he [LePage] believes that the stories which are first discovered come as images and fragments from memories, dreams, through accidents, and that, which pursued further, that they provide material that helps the actor-creator to individually develop their own truth”, even though none of the group had been through or witnessed a domestically violent relationship, we could see how people are treated and wanted to spread the message as both a warning and to bring the subject out into the open. Throughout the process we all experienced different types of emotions, mine mainly focused on vulnerability, fear, confusion, horror and revilement culminating in a display of strength of character as the bully is shunned.
Being a community of sorts, we all felt uneasiness with the character of Andy. Due to him being ‘the man’, I felt scared and vulnerable when I was around him from the very beginning of the process, but towards the end I felt I needed to be strong, and I wanted to try to hurt him as a form of revenge to see how he liked it. I was disgusted by his gaze and hated him even looking at us and we were all so appalled we wanted to retaliate. We tried to grab him, trip him up and barge him and our hatred united us. This empowered the community to no longer be frightened but to initiate change.
With Robert LePage’s devising formula RSVP model, I found that throughout the ‘Validation’ stage of the process I did feel scared and vulnerable but also felt a need to fight back. During the ‘Performance’ stage, these feelings intensified and became more real through the vehicle of our acting, and with our empathising with our own personas and that of the other performers. The relationship between Jade and me changed as we began comforting each other and this reinforced our bond, which was mirrored by other group members.
Despite the many diverse characters on stage, we all shared similar emotions at some point. The sisterhood of women in the final ensemble showed the man weak and alone and the females were in the ascendency. In the end the woman left the man and this was entirely due to his own insecurities and the fact he could not accept her love without it transforming to hate.
2) Going into the space two days before the performance I personally felt excited, scared and naive. I noticed straight away that compared to the rooms we were using for the ‘Validation’ part of the module, the stage space was both deeper and narrower. When beginning the run-through for the first couple of times in the new space, you could tell that some of the cast members were being a little egotistical in wanting the ‘lime-light’, but as was stated whilst rehearsing, you could be seen wherever you were on stage.
At the beginning I think it was a struggle for the cast to get to grips with the new area, and this detracted from our acting. As Callery states the community are “…connected to the space they occupy.” (Callery, 2006, p 84). Originally in the last ensemble Zareena and me were near the front of the stage by Charlotte, but once on stage we found that there was not enough room for us there due to the lack of width so we adapted the sequence and performed it on the central pillar endowing the whole performance with an increased visual spectacle gained from the increased height.
Another obstacle we all had to deal with was the properties that were available. The bar the directors ordered for the ‘funny group’ did not arrive as expected, it being a size we had not accounted for. One part of the scene involved me and Steph jumping up onto the bar and then Emma and Jade pushing us off. We had to delete this and replace it with a simple movement which would allow us to be able to carry on with the rest of the scene.
A definite strength was that as a cast we were all patient and prepared for change and were able to use our enthusiasm for the new space to overcome disappointments with the area and properties. A strength that would have alleviated this further would have been to check out the space we would be using as early as possible during the ‘Research’ phase. The lack of reconnaissance was a serious weakness, if we had gained access to the theatre before the validation process, we could have taken measurements and photographs which would have given us the usable dimensions of the stage space we were to be working in. We would then have been able to adapt to this whilst in the studio during the validation process and as a consequence we may have had better ideas for utilising the space. The outcome would have been a smoother transition when we were finally allowed in and this would have let us concentrate more fully on the acting and given more time for rehearsal. As it turned out we were spending valuable time still devising due to our being in unplanned for parts of the theatre and being unable to work as expected with certain props.
A strength could be identified in that by having to revise our performances we were able to look at them afresh and bring something new to it in the eleventh hour, but there is also the weakness of the performance being a little rough around the edges due to the freshness of the changes we had to make.
3) The growth of the performance from when we moved into the space felt strange but invigorating. The RSVP model was still being used throughout the three performances to the very end, due to it being in a new space from that originally envisaged. As a community we had to remember the ‘Research’ stage of the model and put it to the test when going into the new space, because we were all wary and did not know if it was going to go as planned and rehearsed in the space where we had been for almost a whole year. The ‘Validation’ phase was throughout all three performances, after the initial performance we were given some feedback that was designed to try to make the piece more enjoyable and interesting for the audience. For me the ‘Perfomance’ stage finally matured on the final night. I felt really emotional and fell much deeper into my character at this point, and I felt a similar vibe from the other cast members resulting in heightened emotions on display and a more cohesive cast on stage.
Personally I felt as if I had struggled the most with the second show, for some reason I didn’t feel connected to my character as much as during the initial performance. I do not know whether this was due to performing well and better than expected at the premiere that maybe I let myself down by thinking the second show was in the bag . Personally my best performance, both emotionally and physically, was the last show. Whether this was because it was the last show, knowing I would never have to opportunity to spread this message again in this forma,t or if it was due to the warm up beforehand. Either way it was the first time that I started crying without even realising it. I think the third warm up worked the best for me as I was constantly focused and in character at all times.
“…in LePage’s experience the group may, without realising it find something that relates to the audience and establish an emotional connection with them. Artists do not have control over this aspect of the creative process, where the meaning behind the stories come out at the end of the creative process instead of at the beginning” (Dundjerovic, 2009, pg 95)
I concur that the group without realising, connects with the audience, although that was our main aim from the very beginning that as a community we wanted to connect with the audience and show them how domestic violence is something which is always occurring sight unseen, and how it can be mentally and physically draining and debilitating.
“Domestic abuse does not just mean that your partner is hitting you. The abuse can be physical, sexual or verbal. Domestic violence can also include many things, such as the constant breaking of trust, psychological games, harassment and financial control.” (http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/CrimeJusticeAndTheLaw/VictimsOfCrime/DG_4003136)
Once we had performed our second show which I felt a bit of a let down in, a girl came up to a few of us and expressed her happiness that the woman was able to leave without getting maimed or killed. She told us how she had been in that position once in her life, and how the piece made her feel both strong and proud. This was so rewarding for me, even though I didn’t get to play one of the women, I was just really please that we could have made an audience member feel like that. “The value of the devising experience is not only for the company, but also for the audience participating in the theatrical communion” (Oddey, 1994, p 103)
Bibliography:
CALLERY, D. (2001) Through the body, a practical guide to physical theatre London: Nick Hern Books.
Carlson, M.A (2004) Performance: a critical introduction. Routledge.
DUNDJEROVIC, A (2009) Robert Lepage Routledge. Taylor & Francis e-library (2008)
ODDEY, A. (1994) Devising Theatre: a practical and theoretical handbook, London: Routledge.
Websites:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/CrimeJusticeAndTheLaw/VictimsOfCrime/DG_4003136
Being a community of sorts, we all felt uneasiness with the character of Andy. Due to him being ‘the man’, I felt scared and vulnerable when I was around him from the very beginning of the process, but towards the end I felt I needed to be strong, and I wanted to try to hurt him as a form of revenge to see how he liked it. I was disgusted by his gaze and hated him even looking at us and we were all so appalled we wanted to retaliate. We tried to grab him, trip him up and barge him and our hatred united us. This empowered the community to no longer be frightened but to initiate change.
With Robert LePage’s devising formula RSVP model, I found that throughout the ‘Validation’ stage of the process I did feel scared and vulnerable but also felt a need to fight back. During the ‘Performance’ stage, these feelings intensified and became more real through the vehicle of our acting, and with our empathising with our own personas and that of the other performers. The relationship between Jade and me changed as we began comforting each other and this reinforced our bond, which was mirrored by other group members.
Despite the many diverse characters on stage, we all shared similar emotions at some point. The sisterhood of women in the final ensemble showed the man weak and alone and the females were in the ascendency. In the end the woman left the man and this was entirely due to his own insecurities and the fact he could not accept her love without it transforming to hate.
2) Going into the space two days before the performance I personally felt excited, scared and naive. I noticed straight away that compared to the rooms we were using for the ‘Validation’ part of the module, the stage space was both deeper and narrower. When beginning the run-through for the first couple of times in the new space, you could tell that some of the cast members were being a little egotistical in wanting the ‘lime-light’, but as was stated whilst rehearsing, you could be seen wherever you were on stage.
At the beginning I think it was a struggle for the cast to get to grips with the new area, and this detracted from our acting. As Callery states the community are “…connected to the space they occupy.” (Callery, 2006, p 84). Originally in the last ensemble Zareena and me were near the front of the stage by Charlotte, but once on stage we found that there was not enough room for us there due to the lack of width so we adapted the sequence and performed it on the central pillar endowing the whole performance with an increased visual spectacle gained from the increased height.
Another obstacle we all had to deal with was the properties that were available. The bar the directors ordered for the ‘funny group’ did not arrive as expected, it being a size we had not accounted for. One part of the scene involved me and Steph jumping up onto the bar and then Emma and Jade pushing us off. We had to delete this and replace it with a simple movement which would allow us to be able to carry on with the rest of the scene.
A definite strength was that as a cast we were all patient and prepared for change and were able to use our enthusiasm for the new space to overcome disappointments with the area and properties. A strength that would have alleviated this further would have been to check out the space we would be using as early as possible during the ‘Research’ phase. The lack of reconnaissance was a serious weakness, if we had gained access to the theatre before the validation process, we could have taken measurements and photographs which would have given us the usable dimensions of the stage space we were to be working in. We would then have been able to adapt to this whilst in the studio during the validation process and as a consequence we may have had better ideas for utilising the space. The outcome would have been a smoother transition when we were finally allowed in and this would have let us concentrate more fully on the acting and given more time for rehearsal. As it turned out we were spending valuable time still devising due to our being in unplanned for parts of the theatre and being unable to work as expected with certain props.
A strength could be identified in that by having to revise our performances we were able to look at them afresh and bring something new to it in the eleventh hour, but there is also the weakness of the performance being a little rough around the edges due to the freshness of the changes we had to make.
3) The growth of the performance from when we moved into the space felt strange but invigorating. The RSVP model was still being used throughout the three performances to the very end, due to it being in a new space from that originally envisaged. As a community we had to remember the ‘Research’ stage of the model and put it to the test when going into the new space, because we were all wary and did not know if it was going to go as planned and rehearsed in the space where we had been for almost a whole year. The ‘Validation’ phase was throughout all three performances, after the initial performance we were given some feedback that was designed to try to make the piece more enjoyable and interesting for the audience. For me the ‘Perfomance’ stage finally matured on the final night. I felt really emotional and fell much deeper into my character at this point, and I felt a similar vibe from the other cast members resulting in heightened emotions on display and a more cohesive cast on stage.
Personally I felt as if I had struggled the most with the second show, for some reason I didn’t feel connected to my character as much as during the initial performance. I do not know whether this was due to performing well and better than expected at the premiere that maybe I let myself down by thinking the second show was in the bag . Personally my best performance, both emotionally and physically, was the last show. Whether this was because it was the last show, knowing I would never have to opportunity to spread this message again in this forma,t or if it was due to the warm up beforehand. Either way it was the first time that I started crying without even realising it. I think the third warm up worked the best for me as I was constantly focused and in character at all times.
“…in LePage’s experience the group may, without realising it find something that relates to the audience and establish an emotional connection with them. Artists do not have control over this aspect of the creative process, where the meaning behind the stories come out at the end of the creative process instead of at the beginning” (Dundjerovic, 2009, pg 95)
I concur that the group without realising, connects with the audience, although that was our main aim from the very beginning that as a community we wanted to connect with the audience and show them how domestic violence is something which is always occurring sight unseen, and how it can be mentally and physically draining and debilitating.
“Domestic abuse does not just mean that your partner is hitting you. The abuse can be physical, sexual or verbal. Domestic violence can also include many things, such as the constant breaking of trust, psychological games, harassment and financial control.” (http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/CrimeJusticeAndTheLaw/VictimsOfCrime/DG_4003136)
Once we had performed our second show which I felt a bit of a let down in, a girl came up to a few of us and expressed her happiness that the woman was able to leave without getting maimed or killed. She told us how she had been in that position once in her life, and how the piece made her feel both strong and proud. This was so rewarding for me, even though I didn’t get to play one of the women, I was just really please that we could have made an audience member feel like that. “The value of the devising experience is not only for the company, but also for the audience participating in the theatrical communion” (Oddey, 1994, p 103)
Bibliography:
CALLERY, D. (2001) Through the body, a practical guide to physical theatre London: Nick Hern Books.
Carlson, M.A (2004) Performance: a critical introduction. Routledge.
DUNDJEROVIC, A (2009) Robert Lepage Routledge. Taylor & Francis e-library (2008)
ODDEY, A. (1994) Devising Theatre: a practical and theoretical handbook, London: Routledge.
Websites:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/CrimeJusticeAndTheLaw/VictimsOfCrime/DG_4003136
Assessment blog 3, Sophie Horton, 0819714.
1). The progression from the ‘Validation’ stage to the ‘Performance’ stage (of Robert Lepage’s devising framework) invoked the common themes/issues of domestic violence, oppressive love, guilt, anger, persuasion, control and hope within the performance Four Ways To Speak Out.
As a company, we had a shared perspective of what we wanted the piece to communicate- that abusive relationships are escapable. However, through exploring ‘the woman’s’ story, we embarked on individual character journeys that bought additional elements and dynamics to the performance. “For Lepage, it is important for the RSVP cycles to represent something quite different for each deviser individually and to produce different results in performance” (Dundjerovic, 2008, p.38). In response to this statement, I personally feel that it was in the ‘performance’ phase of the devising process, that most people had effectively discovered their characters and their roles within the community. The ‘validation’ stage, for me, felt like going though the mechanics of the piece, although I had a ‘character’- to some extent, it was not until the production week that I felt most emotionally attached to the piece and my characters own story. “Subjectivity […] is central to the creative process” (Dundjerovic, 2008, p.38). Although the cast had a collective vision about the piece and its purpose, it was important for us to have individual goals, “from the spectators’ point of view, physical theatre accentuates the audience’s imaginative involvement and engagement with what is taking place on stage” (Callery, 2001, p.5). The audience would witness and follow the ‘woman’s’ story, but the ‘performance’ needed to have underlying sub-plots and themes relating to the overall concept, in order to bring the community ensemble to life.
The community’s state of ‘liminality’ was consecutive throughout the entire piece, inducing feelings of disorientation and loss of identity. This transpired as a result of the guilt felt by the ensemble, after they discovered that Andrews’s character was the reason behind the woman’s disappearance- and they did nothing about it. “Domestic violence may include a range of abusive behaviours not all of which are in themselves inherently ‘violent’” (http://www.womensaid.org.uk/domestic-violence-articles). Therefore, these kinds of situations are common within communities, as not all cases of domestic violence are obvious to descry.
The main ‘shared experiences’ that unified the community were all of the ensemble sequences. The first sequence occurred after the discovery of the woman’s suitcase and Andy instigated the movements, eventually drawing individuals in at an arbitrary pace. Some people took longer than others to join the ensemble, but eventually everyone was persuaded. It was the first ‘moment’ in the piece where we portrayed a sense of ‘togetherness’, but not necessarily in a positive manner (the audience would have seen some characters reluctance to join the ensemble and questioned why they weren’t as willing as others). This sense of ‘unease’ remained apparent in all 3 of the ensemble sequences-as the community became amalgamated in their guilt over the woman’s story (revealed through a series of diary entries). Also, in this first sequence, the community were blaming Daniels character for the woman leaving. Similarly, in times of crisis amongst real communities there is usually an agreed target in which the majority choose to blame.
2). As the ensemble left the studio and entered the theatre space, Four Ways To Speak Out finally became ‘real’. I was initially struck by the scenographic impact of the space- as we had a real bar and bed, making the environment of the piece substantive. We had spent months in the studio ‘picturing’ what the set would look like, so exploring the actual space of the performance triggered new responses from the cast (in regards to the piece and their characters) For e.g. I was immediately drawn to the ‘bedroom’ and the back of the stage, as I felt that these were ‘safe’ places for my character to be. “Analysing stage space in semiotic terms provokes consideration of its metaphorical and fictional significations, such as whether it represents a recognizable place […] and/or whether it is abstract, invoking a mood of airy optimism or restricted oppression” (Allain & Harvie, 2006, p.206). For most people, a ‘bedroom’ is somewhere personal where you can isolate yourself from the rest of the world. So hopefully the audience would have made this connection- that the characters ‘hiding’ in the bedroom were ‘hiding’ for a reason.
Although the transition from the studio into the theatre space provided new and exciting discoveries for the cast, it also issued a number of problems. The most prominent being our ability to ‘fill the space’. “In a sense all actors are exhibitionists: they enjoy being seen, being found appealing and worth looking at” (Berger, 1988, p.183). This became evident as we started rehearsing in the performance space- individuals became ‘selfish’ (to a degree) and feared that if they weren’t near the front of the stage, they wouldn’t or couldn’t be seen. However, after the novelty of actually ‘being’ in the theatre worn off, cast members became more relaxed and filled the periphery space adequately.
Another issue that emerged when rehearsing the piece in the theatre space was stage positioning, for e.g. the stage in the Arena theatre is much narrower than the space in the studio (again it was crucial that performers filled the entire space). However, it wasn’t as wide in the theatre (as in the studio) and so certain movements were hard to recreate on the stage, such as the 2nd ensemble sequence. To overcome this, we revisited this section numerous times, to ensure that we had enough space to perform the sequence both carefully and effectively.
Ultimately, it is down to us as performers to have good stage familiarity, “commanding the stage demands a control of the space […] the actor has to read the space. But in order to do this s/he has first to really ‘see it’, to create parallels of attention so that the whole space becomes their field of vision.” (Callery, 2001, p.79). This is paramount when working in a theatrical environment. The studio space was essentially clear- we had no set or obstacles to work around. Therefore, another key issue that we had to consider when moving into the theatre space, was the incorporation of set and theatrical surroundings, for e.g. during a rehearsal I misjudged the space and hit a light with my leg. It is the awareness of minor details like this that contribute to the success of an actor’s adaptation to a new performance environment.
3). Physical theatre, as a performance genre, contrasts conventional theatre in every sense, “[…] modern performance has defined itself in opposition to traditional theatre […] championing the operations of chance and the physical awareness of the performative situation against the control […] of conventional theatre” (Carlson, 2004, p.22). Therefore, in reference to Lepage’s RSVP model of devising, the ‘performance’ phase wasn’t simply a physical recital of what we had already created, it was the final chance for our characters to develop and find their place within the ‘community’.
“The continual evolution intrinsic to such a process allows the piece to be ‘living’ theatre […] it can constantly change, even during its performance run” (Mackey, 1997, p.113). This is reflective of the situation that I found myself in during the ‘performance’ phase of the process. My ‘character’ had never really been anything or anybody within the community (during the earlier stages of the work). The ‘Research’ phase had initiated specific concepts and emotions for me, however, I never really developed an attachment to my ‘character’ and its individual story as a result of these. I became complaisant in the sessions, and rather than making the most of exploring my character, I chose to focus on the mechanics of the piece (what moves I had to do and where I was positioned in the space). This affected my ‘emotional journey’ which at times was quite discouraging, because I wanted to feel a part of the community and to have a role within it. It wasn’t until the latter stages of the process that I developed a real connection to the piece- provoked by Andrew Smiths character. He was the reason the woman had disappeared and everything about him aggravated me. From the ‘street’ section- where he was getting all the girls attention, to the ‘chaos ensemble’ where he so desperately wanted the community’s forgiveness (he never really knew what he’d done wrong). Throughout the ‘validation’ phase of the process, I felt nothing but resentment for this character, so I was surprised when this drastically changed during a character warm-up before a run of the piece, “A sense of freedom in the work encourages flexibility, with a resulting immediacy and sense of growth” (Mackey, 1997, p.113). The emotionally driven warm up helped me to loose my inhibitions, and go along with any impulses felt by the body in that particular moment. This led me to hug Andrews’s character and not want to let him go (in the bedroom area) and consequently, it was this seminal moment in which I fully understood my characters story and role within the community. I had been a victim of this mans oppressive love in the past, only I had never seen that he was ‘bad’ for me and I became jealous every time he’d found a new lover. I was angry at him because I couldn’t have him. And I felt guilty because if my character could have just got him to stay with her, he’d have never hurt the ‘woman’ and she’d have never disappeared. In discovering this, it became clear how Lepage’s RSVP devising framework continues to apply-even in the final stages of a performance process.
(1,607 words)
Bibliography
Allain, P & Harvie, J (2006) The Routledge companion to theatre and performance. London: Routledge
Berger, A.A (1988) Media USA: Process and effect
Callery, D (2001) Through the body: a practical guide to physical theatre. London: Routledge
Carlson, M.A (2004) Performance: a critical introduction. Routledge.
Dundjerovic, A (2008) ‘Robert Lepage’ Taylor & Francis e-library
Mackey, S (1997) Practical theatre: a post-16 approach. Stanley Thornes Publishers.
http://www.womensaid.org.uk/domestic-violence-articles
As a company, we had a shared perspective of what we wanted the piece to communicate- that abusive relationships are escapable. However, through exploring ‘the woman’s’ story, we embarked on individual character journeys that bought additional elements and dynamics to the performance. “For Lepage, it is important for the RSVP cycles to represent something quite different for each deviser individually and to produce different results in performance” (Dundjerovic, 2008, p.38). In response to this statement, I personally feel that it was in the ‘performance’ phase of the devising process, that most people had effectively discovered their characters and their roles within the community. The ‘validation’ stage, for me, felt like going though the mechanics of the piece, although I had a ‘character’- to some extent, it was not until the production week that I felt most emotionally attached to the piece and my characters own story. “Subjectivity […] is central to the creative process” (Dundjerovic, 2008, p.38). Although the cast had a collective vision about the piece and its purpose, it was important for us to have individual goals, “from the spectators’ point of view, physical theatre accentuates the audience’s imaginative involvement and engagement with what is taking place on stage” (Callery, 2001, p.5). The audience would witness and follow the ‘woman’s’ story, but the ‘performance’ needed to have underlying sub-plots and themes relating to the overall concept, in order to bring the community ensemble to life.
The community’s state of ‘liminality’ was consecutive throughout the entire piece, inducing feelings of disorientation and loss of identity. This transpired as a result of the guilt felt by the ensemble, after they discovered that Andrews’s character was the reason behind the woman’s disappearance- and they did nothing about it. “Domestic violence may include a range of abusive behaviours not all of which are in themselves inherently ‘violent’” (http://www.womensaid.org.uk/domestic-violence-articles). Therefore, these kinds of situations are common within communities, as not all cases of domestic violence are obvious to descry.
The main ‘shared experiences’ that unified the community were all of the ensemble sequences. The first sequence occurred after the discovery of the woman’s suitcase and Andy instigated the movements, eventually drawing individuals in at an arbitrary pace. Some people took longer than others to join the ensemble, but eventually everyone was persuaded. It was the first ‘moment’ in the piece where we portrayed a sense of ‘togetherness’, but not necessarily in a positive manner (the audience would have seen some characters reluctance to join the ensemble and questioned why they weren’t as willing as others). This sense of ‘unease’ remained apparent in all 3 of the ensemble sequences-as the community became amalgamated in their guilt over the woman’s story (revealed through a series of diary entries). Also, in this first sequence, the community were blaming Daniels character for the woman leaving. Similarly, in times of crisis amongst real communities there is usually an agreed target in which the majority choose to blame.
2). As the ensemble left the studio and entered the theatre space, Four Ways To Speak Out finally became ‘real’. I was initially struck by the scenographic impact of the space- as we had a real bar and bed, making the environment of the piece substantive. We had spent months in the studio ‘picturing’ what the set would look like, so exploring the actual space of the performance triggered new responses from the cast (in regards to the piece and their characters) For e.g. I was immediately drawn to the ‘bedroom’ and the back of the stage, as I felt that these were ‘safe’ places for my character to be. “Analysing stage space in semiotic terms provokes consideration of its metaphorical and fictional significations, such as whether it represents a recognizable place […] and/or whether it is abstract, invoking a mood of airy optimism or restricted oppression” (Allain & Harvie, 2006, p.206). For most people, a ‘bedroom’ is somewhere personal where you can isolate yourself from the rest of the world. So hopefully the audience would have made this connection- that the characters ‘hiding’ in the bedroom were ‘hiding’ for a reason.
Although the transition from the studio into the theatre space provided new and exciting discoveries for the cast, it also issued a number of problems. The most prominent being our ability to ‘fill the space’. “In a sense all actors are exhibitionists: they enjoy being seen, being found appealing and worth looking at” (Berger, 1988, p.183). This became evident as we started rehearsing in the performance space- individuals became ‘selfish’ (to a degree) and feared that if they weren’t near the front of the stage, they wouldn’t or couldn’t be seen. However, after the novelty of actually ‘being’ in the theatre worn off, cast members became more relaxed and filled the periphery space adequately.
Another issue that emerged when rehearsing the piece in the theatre space was stage positioning, for e.g. the stage in the Arena theatre is much narrower than the space in the studio (again it was crucial that performers filled the entire space). However, it wasn’t as wide in the theatre (as in the studio) and so certain movements were hard to recreate on the stage, such as the 2nd ensemble sequence. To overcome this, we revisited this section numerous times, to ensure that we had enough space to perform the sequence both carefully and effectively.
Ultimately, it is down to us as performers to have good stage familiarity, “commanding the stage demands a control of the space […] the actor has to read the space. But in order to do this s/he has first to really ‘see it’, to create parallels of attention so that the whole space becomes their field of vision.” (Callery, 2001, p.79). This is paramount when working in a theatrical environment. The studio space was essentially clear- we had no set or obstacles to work around. Therefore, another key issue that we had to consider when moving into the theatre space, was the incorporation of set and theatrical surroundings, for e.g. during a rehearsal I misjudged the space and hit a light with my leg. It is the awareness of minor details like this that contribute to the success of an actor’s adaptation to a new performance environment.
3). Physical theatre, as a performance genre, contrasts conventional theatre in every sense, “[…] modern performance has defined itself in opposition to traditional theatre […] championing the operations of chance and the physical awareness of the performative situation against the control […] of conventional theatre” (Carlson, 2004, p.22). Therefore, in reference to Lepage’s RSVP model of devising, the ‘performance’ phase wasn’t simply a physical recital of what we had already created, it was the final chance for our characters to develop and find their place within the ‘community’.
“The continual evolution intrinsic to such a process allows the piece to be ‘living’ theatre […] it can constantly change, even during its performance run” (Mackey, 1997, p.113). This is reflective of the situation that I found myself in during the ‘performance’ phase of the process. My ‘character’ had never really been anything or anybody within the community (during the earlier stages of the work). The ‘Research’ phase had initiated specific concepts and emotions for me, however, I never really developed an attachment to my ‘character’ and its individual story as a result of these. I became complaisant in the sessions, and rather than making the most of exploring my character, I chose to focus on the mechanics of the piece (what moves I had to do and where I was positioned in the space). This affected my ‘emotional journey’ which at times was quite discouraging, because I wanted to feel a part of the community and to have a role within it. It wasn’t until the latter stages of the process that I developed a real connection to the piece- provoked by Andrew Smiths character. He was the reason the woman had disappeared and everything about him aggravated me. From the ‘street’ section- where he was getting all the girls attention, to the ‘chaos ensemble’ where he so desperately wanted the community’s forgiveness (he never really knew what he’d done wrong). Throughout the ‘validation’ phase of the process, I felt nothing but resentment for this character, so I was surprised when this drastically changed during a character warm-up before a run of the piece, “A sense of freedom in the work encourages flexibility, with a resulting immediacy and sense of growth” (Mackey, 1997, p.113). The emotionally driven warm up helped me to loose my inhibitions, and go along with any impulses felt by the body in that particular moment. This led me to hug Andrews’s character and not want to let him go (in the bedroom area) and consequently, it was this seminal moment in which I fully understood my characters story and role within the community. I had been a victim of this mans oppressive love in the past, only I had never seen that he was ‘bad’ for me and I became jealous every time he’d found a new lover. I was angry at him because I couldn’t have him. And I felt guilty because if my character could have just got him to stay with her, he’d have never hurt the ‘woman’ and she’d have never disappeared. In discovering this, it became clear how Lepage’s RSVP devising framework continues to apply-even in the final stages of a performance process.
(1,607 words)
Bibliography
Allain, P & Harvie, J (2006) The Routledge companion to theatre and performance. London: Routledge
Berger, A.A (1988) Media USA: Process and effect
Callery, D (2001) Through the body: a practical guide to physical theatre. London: Routledge
Carlson, M.A (2004) Performance: a critical introduction. Routledge.
Dundjerovic, A (2008) ‘Robert Lepage’ Taylor & Francis e-library
Mackey, S (1997) Practical theatre: a post-16 approach. Stanley Thornes Publishers.
http://www.womensaid.org.uk/domestic-violence-articles
Jade bevington 0819795 blog 3
Final blog, Four Ways to Speak out
1).According to the framework of the RSVP cycle the ‘V’ stage is the valuation stage, “is not about evaluation, which is a psychological process, but about selecting the best from a number of improvised scores, so it can be developed further into a performance” (Dundjerovic, 2009, p 37). The ‘P’ stage is the performance which “refers to improvisations of these selected scores” (Dundjerovic, 2009, p 37). When considering this framework in reference to Four Ways to Speak Out, the best material was improved and things that weren’t working where left behind. DV8 Theatre Company also adopts this style of working as they discuss in an interview, ““have the courage to throw out ideas that weren't working, no matter how wonderful or logical they appear” (Dv8, Interviews, 1993, p11-13). The core themes became more solid when moving into the ‘performance’ stage. The “basic fabric” of the piece was the “missing woman”, the theme of domestic violence was another core theme, domestic violence is not just physical “The violence can be psychological, physical, sexual or emotional” (www.homeoffice.gov.uk). Four ways to speak out explored all of these areas.
The themes of guilt and blame had emerged and grown from the core theme. These emotions were now the driving force behind the ensemble. The sense of guilt and blame were themes that were explored throughout the performance. In the first ensemble sequence, the community realised the woman had disappeared, the blame was place upon Dan, this was demonstrated in the ‘point’ gesture, where the community turned on Dan and the ‘point’ was directed at him. Alongside blame was confusion, animosity, worry and also intrigue. The intrigue was another theme which drove the story, in the sense that the community needed to know what had happened to the woman. This intrigued was communicated by the ensemble never leaving the stage; they remained present at all times, and watched the story unfold, alongside the audience, learning and reacting to the diary entries and the flashbacks. “physical theatres are [...] the making of sounds, the speaking of words, the listening to these sounds and words.” (Murray and Keefe, 2007, pg 35).
As the story progressed, the ensemble shared many experiences in discovering what had happened to the missing woman, this was shown through a variety of flashbacks and diary entries .This shared discovery tied the community together, as the flashbacks provided an insight into their past, from the Woman’s perspective. The flashback of the rape scene is one example of this, the community could see how ignorant they had been, and saw that we were all to blame. This collective emotion brought the ensemble closer together.
The second ensemble was again fuelled by a communal sense of guilt, with also a sense of anger towards Andy. When this point of the performance had been reached, the atmosphere was extremely tense, and had grown from a sad, guilt filled atmosphere to one of anger and hostility. The community were rejecting Andy, and literally running from his presence, at this moment the community formed a united front against him, and shared a mutual hatred.
2).When the group moved into the theatre after months of the rehearsal process taking place in the studio, a few problems arose. I believe this happened because the group were “connected to the space they occupy” (Callery, 2006, p 84). All the findings and discoveries had taken place in the studio, so when the group were faced with a new space (the theatre), just one day before the performance, it was slightly unnerving. The positioning of the stage meant minor adjustments needed to be made. An example of this was the “Bar scene”, we had been expecting a full length bar, and rehearsed with that in mind, but the actual bar, was substantially smaller than expected. The piece had to be adapted; however this was to be expected as this often happens in devised work, “The fine tuning of all performance elements did not happen until the dress rehearsal stage and run of performances” (Oddey, 1996, p128).
The space itself was a totally different, dynamically, to the rehearsal space. The stage was much deeper and narrower, and we had a lot more obstructions to face, such as the bedroom set, and the floor lighting. We, as a group, had to familiarise ourselves with the space once again “Commanding the stage demands a control of the space” (Callery, 2001, p79). The props were another challenge, we had not rehearsed with real liquids before, and I had not rehearsed carrying a tray with a heavy bottle upon it, it was not a major difficulty, though it did hinder concentration. This use of real props affected the whole group, as they had to be aware of spillage which had not been an issue in the studio rehearsals.
The depth of the stage created an issue, where many members of the group were positioning themselves at the front of the stage. The groups spatial awareness had been clouded by selfish instincts, and made some believe they could only be seen at the front of the stage, which is not the case. This is a common misconception, DV8 discuss a similar issue in an interview “a large auditorium, the subtleties of the gestures are often missed and performers feel they have to make actions bigger and in many cases they become less real” (DV8, Interviews, 1993, p11-13).
However, the transition from the studio to theatre was not an entirely negative experience. To be able to see the stage scenographically complete, brought the performance to light, the props and set “expose and validate their original meaning” (Holder, 2005, p 115). It rekindled some of the lost excitement and passion for the piece. The visualisation of the set also provided the “missing pieces” to the process, and provided a platform to the final performance.
3). The first show, in my opinion lacked sincerity and felt slightly robotic, this may have been due to the fact that the morning run had been particularly emotionally intense, so the group felt somewhat drained. Personally I believe the first ensemble was particularly weak in emotional intention. I remember going through the motions, and struggling to find intention behind the movement, and I could sense the group were having a similar experience to myself. This may have occurred because of the audience’s presence. It was the first time we had performed with an audience, so it was bound to have an effect on the group. As Callery discusses “a defensive attitude towards the audience, as though they have come to judge or, worse asses any particular actor’s performance, is counterproductive.” (Callery, 2001, p103) the group may have been worried about the audience’s reaction, and anxious as to what they would think of the performance as a whole, and to them as individual performer. I did become more self aware when they audience was present, in the rehearsal process the group had built a trusting relationship amongst each other, but when the audience were watching our community was exposed, this made the performance an entirely different experience.
The second performance felt different again, but I have come to learn this is the case in this genre of theatre “it’s alive, it changes every night” (Huxley & Witts, 1996, p239). During the warm up I felt tired and emotionally drained, and I could sense that the rest of the group also felt this way; I had to really delve deep into my characters mind and body to find the strength to carry on. I used the tiredness to aid my performance by making my “drunkenness” even bigger and more exaggerated.
Before the show, Royona said that the “funny bar” needed to become “nightmarish” and almost clown like. So when it came to that scene my character had evolved again, I had become my character from Naomi’s nightmare, I felt evil and wanted to frighten Naomi, this was a new layer to my character. This evil side to my character made the guilt and shame stronger than ever before.
The final performance was the most emotional performance for me, and it again changed from the previous night. The RSVP model was still applicable even at this final stage of the performance. “’Performance as a final part of the RSVP cycles, [is] not necessarily a finalized and fixed performance as expected in professional theatre; on the contrary the performance structure remains fluid and open to further change”( Dundjerovic,2009, p 30). The second ensemble, where the group ran to their partners, had a significant difference for Liz and I. The dynamic in the relationship had changed dramatically from her being my protector to, me being hers. I was no longer scared of Andy, I felt aggressive and confrontational towards him. I was no longer running away from him, I was running to protect Liz. This change had occurred after my character had dealt with sever shame during the second performance; by this point I had decided I couldn’t let Andy hurt anyone else, especially Liz. At this moment I felt truly involved and sincerely truthful in what I was performing. “with an actual exchange of emotion between the actors, the scene instantly will come alive” (Allensworth et.al, 1982, Pg.165).
Bibliography
ALLENSWORTH, C, ALLENSWORTH, D, & RAWSON, C. (1982) The Complete Play Production Handbook. New York. Harper &Row
CALLERY, D. (2001) Through the body, a practical guide to physical theatre London: Nick Hern Books.
DUNDJEROVIC, A (2009) Robert Lepage Routledge. Taylor & Francis e-library (2008)
HOLDER, M (2005) Scenography in action: space, time and movement in theatre productions, Konstvetenskapliga institution, Stockholm’s University, e-library (2005)
HUXLEY, M & WITTS, N. (1996) The Twentieth-Century Performance Reader: Routledge.
MURRAY, S & J KEEFE (2007) Physical theatres: a critical introduction London: Routledge
ODDEY, A. (1994) Devising Theatre: a practical and theoretical handbook, London: Routledge.
DV8. (1993) Interviews [Accessed 26th April 2010]. Available at:
http://www.dv8.co.uk/about_dv8/interview_dance_now_lloyd_newson_on_dance
Home office online [Accessed 26th April 2010] Available at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-victims/reducing-crime/domestic-violence/
1).According to the framework of the RSVP cycle the ‘V’ stage is the valuation stage, “is not about evaluation, which is a psychological process, but about selecting the best from a number of improvised scores, so it can be developed further into a performance” (Dundjerovic, 2009, p 37). The ‘P’ stage is the performance which “refers to improvisations of these selected scores” (Dundjerovic, 2009, p 37). When considering this framework in reference to Four Ways to Speak Out, the best material was improved and things that weren’t working where left behind. DV8 Theatre Company also adopts this style of working as they discuss in an interview, ““have the courage to throw out ideas that weren't working, no matter how wonderful or logical they appear” (Dv8, Interviews, 1993, p11-13). The core themes became more solid when moving into the ‘performance’ stage. The “basic fabric” of the piece was the “missing woman”, the theme of domestic violence was another core theme, domestic violence is not just physical “The violence can be psychological, physical, sexual or emotional” (www.homeoffice.gov.uk). Four ways to speak out explored all of these areas.
The themes of guilt and blame had emerged and grown from the core theme. These emotions were now the driving force behind the ensemble. The sense of guilt and blame were themes that were explored throughout the performance. In the first ensemble sequence, the community realised the woman had disappeared, the blame was place upon Dan, this was demonstrated in the ‘point’ gesture, where the community turned on Dan and the ‘point’ was directed at him. Alongside blame was confusion, animosity, worry and also intrigue. The intrigue was another theme which drove the story, in the sense that the community needed to know what had happened to the woman. This intrigued was communicated by the ensemble never leaving the stage; they remained present at all times, and watched the story unfold, alongside the audience, learning and reacting to the diary entries and the flashbacks. “physical theatres are [...] the making of sounds, the speaking of words, the listening to these sounds and words.” (Murray and Keefe, 2007, pg 35).
As the story progressed, the ensemble shared many experiences in discovering what had happened to the missing woman, this was shown through a variety of flashbacks and diary entries .This shared discovery tied the community together, as the flashbacks provided an insight into their past, from the Woman’s perspective. The flashback of the rape scene is one example of this, the community could see how ignorant they had been, and saw that we were all to blame. This collective emotion brought the ensemble closer together.
The second ensemble was again fuelled by a communal sense of guilt, with also a sense of anger towards Andy. When this point of the performance had been reached, the atmosphere was extremely tense, and had grown from a sad, guilt filled atmosphere to one of anger and hostility. The community were rejecting Andy, and literally running from his presence, at this moment the community formed a united front against him, and shared a mutual hatred.
2).When the group moved into the theatre after months of the rehearsal process taking place in the studio, a few problems arose. I believe this happened because the group were “connected to the space they occupy” (Callery, 2006, p 84). All the findings and discoveries had taken place in the studio, so when the group were faced with a new space (the theatre), just one day before the performance, it was slightly unnerving. The positioning of the stage meant minor adjustments needed to be made. An example of this was the “Bar scene”, we had been expecting a full length bar, and rehearsed with that in mind, but the actual bar, was substantially smaller than expected. The piece had to be adapted; however this was to be expected as this often happens in devised work, “The fine tuning of all performance elements did not happen until the dress rehearsal stage and run of performances” (Oddey, 1996, p128).
The space itself was a totally different, dynamically, to the rehearsal space. The stage was much deeper and narrower, and we had a lot more obstructions to face, such as the bedroom set, and the floor lighting. We, as a group, had to familiarise ourselves with the space once again “Commanding the stage demands a control of the space” (Callery, 2001, p79). The props were another challenge, we had not rehearsed with real liquids before, and I had not rehearsed carrying a tray with a heavy bottle upon it, it was not a major difficulty, though it did hinder concentration. This use of real props affected the whole group, as they had to be aware of spillage which had not been an issue in the studio rehearsals.
The depth of the stage created an issue, where many members of the group were positioning themselves at the front of the stage. The groups spatial awareness had been clouded by selfish instincts, and made some believe they could only be seen at the front of the stage, which is not the case. This is a common misconception, DV8 discuss a similar issue in an interview “a large auditorium, the subtleties of the gestures are often missed and performers feel they have to make actions bigger and in many cases they become less real” (DV8, Interviews, 1993, p11-13).
However, the transition from the studio to theatre was not an entirely negative experience. To be able to see the stage scenographically complete, brought the performance to light, the props and set “expose and validate their original meaning” (Holder, 2005, p 115). It rekindled some of the lost excitement and passion for the piece. The visualisation of the set also provided the “missing pieces” to the process, and provided a platform to the final performance.
3). The first show, in my opinion lacked sincerity and felt slightly robotic, this may have been due to the fact that the morning run had been particularly emotionally intense, so the group felt somewhat drained. Personally I believe the first ensemble was particularly weak in emotional intention. I remember going through the motions, and struggling to find intention behind the movement, and I could sense the group were having a similar experience to myself. This may have occurred because of the audience’s presence. It was the first time we had performed with an audience, so it was bound to have an effect on the group. As Callery discusses “a defensive attitude towards the audience, as though they have come to judge or, worse asses any particular actor’s performance, is counterproductive.” (Callery, 2001, p103) the group may have been worried about the audience’s reaction, and anxious as to what they would think of the performance as a whole, and to them as individual performer. I did become more self aware when they audience was present, in the rehearsal process the group had built a trusting relationship amongst each other, but when the audience were watching our community was exposed, this made the performance an entirely different experience.
The second performance felt different again, but I have come to learn this is the case in this genre of theatre “it’s alive, it changes every night” (Huxley & Witts, 1996, p239). During the warm up I felt tired and emotionally drained, and I could sense that the rest of the group also felt this way; I had to really delve deep into my characters mind and body to find the strength to carry on. I used the tiredness to aid my performance by making my “drunkenness” even bigger and more exaggerated.
Before the show, Royona said that the “funny bar” needed to become “nightmarish” and almost clown like. So when it came to that scene my character had evolved again, I had become my character from Naomi’s nightmare, I felt evil and wanted to frighten Naomi, this was a new layer to my character. This evil side to my character made the guilt and shame stronger than ever before.
The final performance was the most emotional performance for me, and it again changed from the previous night. The RSVP model was still applicable even at this final stage of the performance. “’Performance as a final part of the RSVP cycles, [is] not necessarily a finalized and fixed performance as expected in professional theatre; on the contrary the performance structure remains fluid and open to further change”( Dundjerovic,2009, p 30). The second ensemble, where the group ran to their partners, had a significant difference for Liz and I. The dynamic in the relationship had changed dramatically from her being my protector to, me being hers. I was no longer scared of Andy, I felt aggressive and confrontational towards him. I was no longer running away from him, I was running to protect Liz. This change had occurred after my character had dealt with sever shame during the second performance; by this point I had decided I couldn’t let Andy hurt anyone else, especially Liz. At this moment I felt truly involved and sincerely truthful in what I was performing. “with an actual exchange of emotion between the actors, the scene instantly will come alive” (Allensworth et.al, 1982, Pg.165).
Bibliography
ALLENSWORTH, C, ALLENSWORTH, D, & RAWSON, C. (1982) The Complete Play Production Handbook. New York. Harper &Row
CALLERY, D. (2001) Through the body, a practical guide to physical theatre London: Nick Hern Books.
DUNDJEROVIC, A (2009) Robert Lepage Routledge. Taylor & Francis e-library (2008)
HOLDER, M (2005) Scenography in action: space, time and movement in theatre productions, Konstvetenskapliga institution, Stockholm’s University, e-library (2005)
HUXLEY, M & WITTS, N. (1996) The Twentieth-Century Performance Reader: Routledge.
MURRAY, S & J KEEFE (2007) Physical theatres: a critical introduction London: Routledge
ODDEY, A. (1994) Devising Theatre: a practical and theoretical handbook, London: Routledge.
DV8. (1993) Interviews [Accessed 26th April 2010]. Available at:
http://www.dv8.co.uk/about_dv8/interview_dance_now_lloyd_newson_on_dance
Home office online [Accessed 26th April 2010] Available at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-victims/reducing-crime/domestic-violence/
Sunday, 25 April 2010
Zareena Ashraf. Blog Post Three
During the validation stage of Four Ways to Speak Out, domestic violence seemed to be the main and only theme running throughout the piece, however as we moved from the validation stage to the performance stage, a new theme started to emerge through the piece, oppressive love.
We used domestic violence as the stimulus and basic framework for Four Ways to Speak Out and so this was why it became such a major theme within the piece. As a group we did not want to portray domestic violence in a literal or stereotypical way because we wanted to create something different and refreshing. The domestic abuse was communicated through the use of voiceover, emotional communication and through the body language of characters. This received positive feedback from audience members who appreciated the use of different conventions and they were relieved that we did not show the woman being physically beaten on stage.
From an audience’s perspective, it was not obvious that the piece was about domestic violence from the start, only after the street scene did this theme start to emerge through the piece. At the beginning the audience was presented with a number of enigma codes, what was in the suitcase? Who does the suitcase belong to? Which of the two boys was involved? Only as the piece developed did they learn the answers. We did not want to overwhelm the audience with domestic abuse and so we decided that adding to it gradually was more effective and evoked more emotion.
Within Four Ways to Speak Out we could see Claude Levi Strauss’s binary oppositions at work as there was a love/hate relationship between Andy and the woman. Despite Andy’s obsession and control over the woman, it was clear that he loved her, however after everything it became impossible for the woman to return his love and this is where the theme of oppressive love came in to the piece.
Throughout the validation process of the piece, when we watched the other groups telling the woman’s story, we almost became audience members as we wanted to see what they had created, we became very insensitive towards our own characters and individual journeys, as this was not the approach we should have taken. Despite this, as Four Ways to Speak Out developed into the performance stage, we were no longer audience members, but we became an emotionally connected ensemble. When watching the woman’s story it was clear that the community was tied together through a feeling of disgust and guilt. At the beginning of the piece the community was broken and fragmented, everyone was independent and would only communicate with certain characters, however as guilt spread through the community, we became emotionally connected with each other, and ultimately we created a bond.
When we initially entered the theatre and saw the set we were all very excited and enthusiastic about working in the space, but as Callery states “the actor has to ‘read’ the space. But in order to do this s/he has first to really ‘see’ it, to create parallels of attention so that the whole space becomes their field of vision.” (2006, p. 79) We had to get used to the space and we had to think about transferring what we had already created from the studios into the space. We were given fifteen minutes to walk through and explore our individual journeys within the space. I initially found it difficult building a relationship with the space; however I found that once we had started to run through the piece I began to adapt to the environment. Callery suggests that an ensemble should be “connected to the space they occupied” (2006, p. 84) and during the first run through it was clear that the whole group had connected with the space and the use of set and props really helped the piece develop further.
The main change that we as a group had to adapt to when moving into the theatre was the size of the space. Although it initially looked a lot smaller than the drama studios, it was actually a similar size as what we lost in width of the space, was made up for by the depth of the space. One of the groups weaknesses was using the space, the group was afraid that they would not be seen if they were at the back and so everyone seemed to litter the front of the stage. As the group came to realise that they could be seen at the back, they started to use the space more effectively.
We only encountered one major spatial difficulty and this was in aspects of the second ensemble with the falls and catches. In the studios we all had our positions and we became aware of who was working around us, when we moved the piece into the theatre space we had to change our initial positions slightly in order for us to complete the falls and catches safely. At first I found it quite uncomfortable and unsafe not knowing who was behind me or next to me, however throughout the rehearsals and the three performances my trust and confidence had grown in relation to who was working close to me within the space.
When warming up in the studios before rehearsals, it became robotic and part of a routine, however moving the warm up into the space was no longer robotic, it became part of the piece. I feel that I learnt a lot about my character through the warm up sessions in the theatre and they became useful with characterisation. I believe that the warm ups in the space contributed to the community’s strong relationship.
The RSVP model was still being applied to Four Ways to Speak Out during the final three performances as when we transferred the piece we created from the studios to the theatre space, it was almost like starting the process again. We had to revisit the research stage as we explored the new space and how that had an impact on our own creative journeys and characters, we still had more to learn even as we entered the theatre for the first time. The validation process was still at work throughout all three performances as we were taking feedback on board and trying to correct or improve on the next performance. I believe we only really reached the P stage of the model during the final performance; the whole ensemble really came together during this performance and had achieved the heightened emotion and sense of community we initially set out for.
The first performance we did was quite nerve racking for some as it was the first time we were showing our devised piece to an audience. The ensemble was thinking too much through this performance, about precision of movements, what scene was next etc. and by doing that we allowed ourselves to lose focus and lose our individual connections to the narrative. The second performance lacked energy; we had all put so much energy into the rehearsal in the morning and the first performance that by the time we had got to the second performance we were all physically and emotionally drained. Personally the second performance was the one that I lost connection with, I was exhausted and felt no real emotion until about half way through the piece where I did manage to get back into it and I became part of the community again. I believe that my lack of connection was due to the warm up prior to the performance, we were asked to get into character and find the most emotional part of our individual journey, my character ended up feeling guilty, shocked and disgusted and so when I went back stage and held on to my character, I found it hard coming on stage completely oblivious to the woman’s story at the beginning of the performance. We did the same warm up before the third performance, however this time I did not allow my character to find out the woman’s story, I wanted to start a fresh journey for the final performance, almost as if it was the first time I had heard the story. During the character warm up my character felt chatty, loud and fidgety, I remained in character back stage and entered the stage with the same emotion. I found that this helped as I could experience the woman’s journey with genuine emotion and it was not forced. The third performance was not only the best one for me but for the whole ensemble. We were all full of energy as there were no rehearsals prior to the performance, everyone seemed to be focused and engaged with the performance and the periphery was alive unlike the previous two performances where the ensemble was too afraid to make any movements.
Overall, Four Ways to Speak Out had grown significantly across the three shows, the ensemble and the individual characters got stronger and stronger throughout the final performances and it was clear that no individual journey or performance was the same in any two shows.
Bibliography
Callery, D. (2001) Through the body, a practical guide to physical theatre. London: Nick Hern Books.
We used domestic violence as the stimulus and basic framework for Four Ways to Speak Out and so this was why it became such a major theme within the piece. As a group we did not want to portray domestic violence in a literal or stereotypical way because we wanted to create something different and refreshing. The domestic abuse was communicated through the use of voiceover, emotional communication and through the body language of characters. This received positive feedback from audience members who appreciated the use of different conventions and they were relieved that we did not show the woman being physically beaten on stage.
From an audience’s perspective, it was not obvious that the piece was about domestic violence from the start, only after the street scene did this theme start to emerge through the piece. At the beginning the audience was presented with a number of enigma codes, what was in the suitcase? Who does the suitcase belong to? Which of the two boys was involved? Only as the piece developed did they learn the answers. We did not want to overwhelm the audience with domestic abuse and so we decided that adding to it gradually was more effective and evoked more emotion.
Within Four Ways to Speak Out we could see Claude Levi Strauss’s binary oppositions at work as there was a love/hate relationship between Andy and the woman. Despite Andy’s obsession and control over the woman, it was clear that he loved her, however after everything it became impossible for the woman to return his love and this is where the theme of oppressive love came in to the piece.
Throughout the validation process of the piece, when we watched the other groups telling the woman’s story, we almost became audience members as we wanted to see what they had created, we became very insensitive towards our own characters and individual journeys, as this was not the approach we should have taken. Despite this, as Four Ways to Speak Out developed into the performance stage, we were no longer audience members, but we became an emotionally connected ensemble. When watching the woman’s story it was clear that the community was tied together through a feeling of disgust and guilt. At the beginning of the piece the community was broken and fragmented, everyone was independent and would only communicate with certain characters, however as guilt spread through the community, we became emotionally connected with each other, and ultimately we created a bond.
When we initially entered the theatre and saw the set we were all very excited and enthusiastic about working in the space, but as Callery states “the actor has to ‘read’ the space. But in order to do this s/he has first to really ‘see’ it, to create parallels of attention so that the whole space becomes their field of vision.” (2006, p. 79) We had to get used to the space and we had to think about transferring what we had already created from the studios into the space. We were given fifteen minutes to walk through and explore our individual journeys within the space. I initially found it difficult building a relationship with the space; however I found that once we had started to run through the piece I began to adapt to the environment. Callery suggests that an ensemble should be “connected to the space they occupied” (2006, p. 84) and during the first run through it was clear that the whole group had connected with the space and the use of set and props really helped the piece develop further.
The main change that we as a group had to adapt to when moving into the theatre was the size of the space. Although it initially looked a lot smaller than the drama studios, it was actually a similar size as what we lost in width of the space, was made up for by the depth of the space. One of the groups weaknesses was using the space, the group was afraid that they would not be seen if they were at the back and so everyone seemed to litter the front of the stage. As the group came to realise that they could be seen at the back, they started to use the space more effectively.
We only encountered one major spatial difficulty and this was in aspects of the second ensemble with the falls and catches. In the studios we all had our positions and we became aware of who was working around us, when we moved the piece into the theatre space we had to change our initial positions slightly in order for us to complete the falls and catches safely. At first I found it quite uncomfortable and unsafe not knowing who was behind me or next to me, however throughout the rehearsals and the three performances my trust and confidence had grown in relation to who was working close to me within the space.
When warming up in the studios before rehearsals, it became robotic and part of a routine, however moving the warm up into the space was no longer robotic, it became part of the piece. I feel that I learnt a lot about my character through the warm up sessions in the theatre and they became useful with characterisation. I believe that the warm ups in the space contributed to the community’s strong relationship.
The RSVP model was still being applied to Four Ways to Speak Out during the final three performances as when we transferred the piece we created from the studios to the theatre space, it was almost like starting the process again. We had to revisit the research stage as we explored the new space and how that had an impact on our own creative journeys and characters, we still had more to learn even as we entered the theatre for the first time. The validation process was still at work throughout all three performances as we were taking feedback on board and trying to correct or improve on the next performance. I believe we only really reached the P stage of the model during the final performance; the whole ensemble really came together during this performance and had achieved the heightened emotion and sense of community we initially set out for.
The first performance we did was quite nerve racking for some as it was the first time we were showing our devised piece to an audience. The ensemble was thinking too much through this performance, about precision of movements, what scene was next etc. and by doing that we allowed ourselves to lose focus and lose our individual connections to the narrative. The second performance lacked energy; we had all put so much energy into the rehearsal in the morning and the first performance that by the time we had got to the second performance we were all physically and emotionally drained. Personally the second performance was the one that I lost connection with, I was exhausted and felt no real emotion until about half way through the piece where I did manage to get back into it and I became part of the community again. I believe that my lack of connection was due to the warm up prior to the performance, we were asked to get into character and find the most emotional part of our individual journey, my character ended up feeling guilty, shocked and disgusted and so when I went back stage and held on to my character, I found it hard coming on stage completely oblivious to the woman’s story at the beginning of the performance. We did the same warm up before the third performance, however this time I did not allow my character to find out the woman’s story, I wanted to start a fresh journey for the final performance, almost as if it was the first time I had heard the story. During the character warm up my character felt chatty, loud and fidgety, I remained in character back stage and entered the stage with the same emotion. I found that this helped as I could experience the woman’s journey with genuine emotion and it was not forced. The third performance was not only the best one for me but for the whole ensemble. We were all full of energy as there were no rehearsals prior to the performance, everyone seemed to be focused and engaged with the performance and the periphery was alive unlike the previous two performances where the ensemble was too afraid to make any movements.
Overall, Four Ways to Speak Out had grown significantly across the three shows, the ensemble and the individual characters got stronger and stronger throughout the final performances and it was clear that no individual journey or performance was the same in any two shows.
Bibliography
Callery, D. (2001) Through the body, a practical guide to physical theatre. London: Nick Hern Books.