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.
No comments:
Post a Comment