After we performed our Comedia De'll Arte play for the next two weeks we focused on absurd theater and started to read the play Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett which included two men called Vladimir and Estragon who reveal they are waiting for a man named Godot. However they are stumbled by the thought of if they are waiting in the correct spot for Godot by the tree or if it's even the right day. Personally when I first started to read the play it was very peculiar and when things are strange to me, or something I'm not use to reading then sooner or later I'd find it boring, which I did. The thought of trying to understand why they are doing certain things in a certain why or saying them is frustrating when the answer is not right in front of you. It required me to analyze the characters, I realized that Vladimir was more of the dominant character who would take the lead in actions or dialogue. Just like at the start of the book the two characters repeat lines from one another and does so throughout the play, which I think is some type of general aspect they habitually do with one another. It is also evident from reading the play that Estragon is dependent on Vladimir, he always wants to be close to him. They have a very strong bond and embrace each other a lot and almost act as a married couple which gives the impression they might be gay. At first when I read the title the name 'Godot' in my mind created a connection between him and God since they do sound similar, Estragon and Vladimir do look up to Godot as being a religious type of figure. One important repetitiveness that struck me was how Estragon wanted to leave, but Vladimir refused to do so and told him they could not go because they are waiting for Godot. With the same lines being repeated reinforces the idea that the same actions are occurring over and over again. What we did in class though to make it more entertaining and lively is that we created accents for the characters and acted out their parts really well to get a sense of what they are like as characters, they were boring individuals when I look at their conversations but the actual gestures and stage directions, there are really a lot of active moment taking place. We also discussed the idea of existentialism which I never even knew about until we talked about it, I learned it is a philosophical movement which emphasizes on individual existence freedom and choice, meaning man can wander between choice and freedom. Existentialism is seen as determining our existence, which leads to the concept of choice making between bad or good is what defines ourselves, without confirmation of our acts we would not know what is right to choose from. The conclusion I found quite good, the play finally reached a point where Estragon and Vladimir realizes that Godot will not come and that they were both just living their lives on repeat and also because Godot never arrives by the tree gives me the impression that Godot might not be a real person and that maybe he is God, maybe he was there with them all along just not literally. I was not very fond of this type of theatre it did not really grab my attention or interest although it challenges your thinking skills and analyzation of things.
We had to perform a scene from the play Waiting for Godot and I worked with Morcom who played Vladimir and I played Estragon, we decided to do a scene from the start of the play to show the significance of the characters relationship between Estragon and Vladimir since it portrays how dependent Estragon is on Vladimir. Even at the very beginning there is the concept of repititiveness that's reocurrng when Vladimir says And they didn't beat you? and afterwards Estragon says Beat me? Certainly they beat me (2)
Vladimir then says The same lot as usual? right after Estragon says The same? I don't know (2)
This to me depicts as though this is the way they have been communicating in general for most of their life time, this seemed strange to me at since since we normally don't speak that way to one another, but rather give a direct answer instead of repeating. In this scene in particular Vladimir plays the role of a 'bum' someone who acts as though he has been drinking since the saying 'a drunken mind speaks sober thoughts' applies here when Vladimir tells Estragon When I think of it... all these years..but for me.. where would you be, you'd be nothing more than a little heap of bones. (3) Vladimir belittles Estragon without Estragon having to realize it or it might be that he is already use to what he says and doesn't mind it since I expected Estragon to say something back at him for saying such a cruel thing. Morcom did a good job on playing the character of Vladimir he performed his role really well as a 'bum' and sometimes even mummbled when Vladimir was just blabbering things that didn't make sense. It was quite hard playing Estragon since I come to find him to be such an innocent character compared to Vladimir who's so demanding and 'a know it all' it seems as though whatever Estragon attempts to do will never be enough for Vladimirs satisfaction. Estragon says Taking off my boot, has that ever happend to you?(3) Vladimir then says Boots must be taken off everyday, I'm tired of telling you that! Why don't you listen to me? In this scene though however sometimes I did not understand what messages the characters were trying to convery, it felt as if they were just talking about random things all over the place. There was not much action taking place in this scene but rather focuses on clearly establishing the connection between the two with their dialogue. It was difficult for me to be Estragon as to not knowing what he was saying half the time sometimes I couldn't make sense of it. I did though try and maintain my character from being so aggresive towards Vladimir especially in this scene and the things he says to Estragon, I did not want to overpower the character and to let the audience percieve Vladimir as the superior one. One thing I could have improved on was the tone of my voice and the gestures. All the sentences are mostly all short, so when I would say something it would go by quicker than I anticipated and it all just felt like such a rush and despite that there were not many gestures, when there was I think I could have exagerated them a bit more since this aspect of absurd theatre has a connection with Comedia De'll Arte in expressing their gestures in an entertaining way to have an ongoing of the audience's attention and also to reach a humour climax to make the audience laugh. In both cases the two types of theatres are different and similar, different in the way that the Comedia characters all have a stereotypical and recognizable character to portray in their scenario and also have to wear masks to help identify to the audience who they are, in abusrd theatre the audience doesn't know right away who the characters might be acting as in Waiting for Godot for example Estragon and Vladimir who when you come to know of them eventually the audience will realize they are two tramps that have repititive dialogue back and forth making this absurd and having no point. The two are similar in the way that the characters act as clowns through their physical movement and tone of voice to prevent losing the audience's attention. In Comedia the laazi and zaini who are servants or even Brighella and Arlechinno act as clowns and jump on eachothers backs, swing eachother in the air to make the audience look at something aswell rather than just listening to their dialogue. Estragon especially does peculiar things inorder to make the audience giggle, such as smelling his boot, airing it and nibbling on it which might be odd but exposes humour. Honestly I would not like being the audience of watching an Absurd theatre play when I realize that in the end, the story doesn't even get anywhere and that there was no point to begin with. If it wasn't for their gestures to keep me entertained I think I'd fall asleep.
During class we also played some improvisation games one was where we had to divide into two groups and stand in two lines opposite one another and the person had to ask a question to the person in the other group and that person has to also then answer with a question for example. Kyla: Have you heard the song Maria Maria? then Asceal would have to answer in a question form aswell and say Oh is that song from Carlos Santana? And once you hesitate you have to go to the back of the line. This was a fun but challenging game to do since you have to think of what your question is going to be right on the spot without producing it into a statement or just repeating the same question over again but having the answer but questioning it. This exercise really made you think, I enjoyed it, I could tell everyone was heavily drawn into it once you get the hang of it. We also played another similar game which was more easier than the previous. It was the same concept just that the teacher would announce a topic lets say Fruit and then the two rows have to name fruits without repeating what the other group said. It required a lot of thinking and listening at the same time, you had to listen to what the other group is saying but at the same time think of your answer. The game just continues until someone runs out of a fruit to say then they are out. For me this game went by a lot faster since while I was waiting in line I could think of a fruit to name and when it was my turn I wouldn't have to think as much, this game had more of an advantage to it than the other one. The other one you wouldn't know what type of question they would ask you.
Monday, May 28, 2012
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Day With The Arts
When it was the day with the arts, I wasn't as nervous as I expected myself to be, I think it might have been because we practiced our Comedia De'll Arte play various times that I got so comfortable with the scenario and also got used to playing my character's role as being Colombine, who is a character that's very witty, fashionable, she has no bad attributes and she's very flirtatious, all the men admire her. I loved playing her character as she was the only girl and it was easier for me to relate to her, than all my peers who had guy characters. When it was time to perform as the audience were sitting down, I could sense back stage the nervousness and everyone including myself hesitated while getting into costume and putting on masks. Once you where your mask it's as if you transform into a whole new being, someone you normally don't see yourself as being. Overall I think we put on a great show and since it was our own creation we decided to incorporate a lot of humorous climaxes, to make the audience laugh, which was a good feeling. It gives you a sensation knowing that you are playing your character well. There's always room for improvement and I thought our expressions and vocals were excellent according to the characters we played, just maybe the gestures could have been more exaggerated, this aspect was difficult since we don't normally use such big gestures in our daily lives, so to portray it, is strange to us. But as long as we portrayed the stereo typical character we were assigned and that the audience could recognize what type of person you are straight away then that's very good. I even forgot some of my lines at the beginning and to make up time, I improvised. I really enjoyed this theater genre as it was very different, using masks and producing large gestures, there's a lot one can do and be creative with it. All you need is a scenario and an ensemble work to put on a humorous climax in the play. My parents really enjoyed the play, they were smiling the whole way through, as for my costume I tried to be as fashionable as I could more than the other characters. I thought in this unit Max was really committed towards his character of Arlecchino, it really showed a different side to him and that he could be a really comical character if he tries.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Commedia De'll Arte
Commedia De'll Arte meaing the comedy of the art, and this theatre genre began in the 16th century where it first began in Italy. This type of style required a strong sense of ensemble acting and to improvise around any given scenario. The actors wore masks and always had to respond to the other actors and to the audience, the actors represented stock characters meaning they were fixed social types. The point of the performances was to reach a humorous climax, the actors first started as street performers and then moved towards acting troupes, each actor was skilled in a specific stock character. This was Colins work shop to inform us what Comedia D'ell Arte was all about, which I think he did a very good job at, although he was a bit nervous but that's normal and later became more comfortable. Colin made us do an activity where one person exits the room and we all choose to play a stereo typical character, I played a 'flirt' and my fellow classmates played as a french tourist and an undercover spy etc. When the person entered the room again, he/she had to predict what characters we were playing by how well we acted it out, the point is to try not to make it too obvious straight away what you are, otherwise that spoils the fun. I went in as a flirt and started flirting with Morcom I could see he was getting uncomfortable and thought my character would be so easy to know what I was, however throughout the whole game I was trying my hardest to flirt with him and the french tourist trying to make it a bit obvious in the end yet he still couldn't get it, only after the game finished I told him my character. I don't know whether I wasn't playing my character well enough or he just had a hard time guessing since I wasn't a specific enough character like a cheerleader etc. I found this game to be a lot of fun and also a good warm up to become a stereo type. I liked this part of theatre a lot since Comedia is about exagoration, improvisation, speech and movements are what is important, as long as you know your character's characteristics etc it should be easy to do. However since we never played stereo typical characters I felt uncomfortable at first with all these big movements and expressions I had to do, but once you get into it, you just go with the flow and start to know your character well and become part of it. I always thought that in theatre seeing facial expressions on an actors face was the most important, but in Comedia they wore masks, which I now know helps the audience recognize the stereo types that occured during the 16th century. Every person had to stick to one character and become very fimiliar with it and play it as a professional. I think improvisation is an important role in Comedia since the actors had to work as an ensemle to reach the humorous climax. Sometimes using what is known as a lazzi which were stage tricks designed to evoke laughter from the audience by using the slapstick which one of the characters named Arlechinno used to slap on the side of his leg for more emphasis on a slapping sound. Wearing the masks I think makes it even harder for the character to portray to the audience how they feel, this is why they have to use big gestures that are exagerated and also the use of their speech and tone can show a lot. We were then assigned to play stereo types, I played Columbine who was a servant maid and very pretty, she was in love with Arlechinno, she flirts a lot and know that the men admire her but once she gets to close and finds herself in an uncomfortable position she slowly steps to the side getting further away from the person. Her speech is very gossipy and high and energetic. In this scenario Pierrot wrote me a letter in which he wanted to read to me but Scaramouche starts to critisize his writings and say it's no good, when he tells Pierrot to start again Scaramouche grabs the paper and reads it to me, this was the humuour climax. As Scaramouche read it to me, I would be swinging my arms and blushing with my face, since we did this without the masks and when I found myself too close I'd slowly move away, my speech would say one thing and my physical attributes another thing. I think I did a good job in doing what I had to, however Mrs Morris gave me constructive feedback on that I should make my movements more bigger since behind the mask they can't see my facial expressions, that I have to practice since I am so used to showing facial expressions.
Brecht Unit
Brecht's use of acting style is very different to other playwrights, I realized that since he uses epic theatre him and Stanislwaski's way of teaching were almost the same, however Brecht believed that gestures played a more important role in his performances whereas Stanislwaski was more about the facial expressions. I found it an interesting way of acting, I always thought acting was about trying to interact with the audience and make them feel emotionally attached, but when I learned about epic theatre it was not always the case. I did not know how an audience cannot get attached to the characters, but then I learned this was done for a reason, it was so that rather entertaining the audience, the play becomes an awareness and message and the gestures and actions happening on stage has a reason behind it and contributes to the overall theme of the play depending on what it is which was usually social issues being the division of social classes. I think it is an effective way to get the audience to think about what is occuring on stage and trying to figure out the message, in a way also participating in the act, by putting the puzzle pieces together and seeking to find a whole image or message in the end. I just kept thinking how can a audience sit there and not get engaged and emotionally attached? when I know I would. But then I learned about alienation devices, where actors use this to build a fourth wall between them and the audience which disables the audience not to get too attached to their characters yet still engaging with them. I also did not know how actors can't connect to their characters until I tried it myself.
At the beginning of the epic theatre unit, we were divided into two groups and were given pictures that symbolized an important point. In our group we had to look at these pictures and discuss what we thought they meant. There were two of the pictures that stood out to me, one was a picture of a mother and a daughter looking very sad and surrounding them was their home, by home I mean tents and houses made of carboard boxes and around them were piles of garabage that was polluting their environment. By looking at this pictures it made me realize the affect of the social classes the rich and the poor. There are so many poor people in the world yet people say they care but they don't do anything about this. To me actions speak louder than words, the only reason I would like to become rich is to give money to the poor and I don't need fancy cars, a house with 55 rooms to be happy in I just need the right and fair amount of money to keep a roof over my head and food on the table. That's what these people are asking for and it breaks my heart to see that there are so many of us that complain about how our lives are not good enough but it's nothing compared to what they go through. It's a pitty that there is even such a thing happening, it's evident that the rich does not care and will only give to the poor if they benefit from it I think, get a reward etc but isn't a reward seeing them smile and living a better life? that would be more than enough for me. Another picture that stood out was one where there was a vulture and a skinny african child on the floor crouching in the heat and the vulture just staring at him. This to me represented how the rich being the vulture is feeding on the poor and they don't realize how much they could help, but only realize and do so once it's too late. This picture really touched me, it just ashame what we let happen sometimes, it's unacceptable and everyday I hope that there's a solution to these kind of problems but the main one is for people to wake up, once they notice with their real eyes and realize what's happening maybe they will do something about it, however it's not always about seeing is believing, knowing that it's happening people should believe in it. Just the 'thought' of it even just makes me want to cry. Brecht's goal was to use social issues like this to portray to the audience what is really going on around them, since some people are just blinded by reality. He wants the audience to leave the theatre with that message in their heads knowing how it affects them and what they can do to make it better. After we looked at the photos we had to come up with a performance that demonstrated these problems, Asceal, Morcorm, Su yin and I came up with a scenario where there is a rich president and has a daughter that's also wealthy a poor shop keeper and a journalist. The president is interviewed by the journalist who is me, and asks questions about the economic crisis that the president just doesn't seem to care about. As the journalist it was a tough role to play, I think it was challenging to not get too attached to what I was doing and focus more on the point I was trying to prove which was that the rich people including the president does not care about the people and only himself. As an alienation device I would stand up and get out of character and narrate in third person about what the journalist thought about the president, it was a way of getting the audience to engage more and to not get too attached at the same time. His daughter goes shopping and meets a shop keeper and is very greedy to her since she is rich she thinks she can do anything, later they become friends and brings her home to the presidents house and realizes that there are so many poor people and that her dad the president has to do something about this problem. He first disagrees but later realizes that his people need him and solves the problem, depicting what people should really do and not just sit there and watch people die, everyone is born and because of that, they matter. I think we did a great job overall in trying to get the message across about the rich not caring about the poor. The difficulties I had would most probably be trying to get out of character quick enough to narrate, since I still found myself at times still being attached to who I was, as being the journalist. I also guess as a person it touches you and how sensitive you are to these things.
Another Brecht scene we had to do was from The Caucasian Chalk Circle where I played Grusha and Su yin played Simon. The Caucasian Circle was a play written by Brecht, it's two stories that come together in the end. Grusha, a kitchen maid, becomes engaged to a soldier named Simon. Soon thereafter, during the coup, she has Michael handed to her. She hides the child from the Fat Prince and his soldiers, thereby saving the child's life. In the caucasian circle the readers will notice that the characters names are very different and not what you would normally here nowadays, this was because some characters didn't even have proper names such as Fat Prince and was only named this way according to their rank and importance. People with more better names such as Grusha was most probably more important than the fat prince since she has an actual name instead of a description. We played the scene where Grusha has the baby and Simon finds out, we set the stage where I was on one side facing in a diagonal direction and the same for Simon on the other side, this way the audience will see we have no emotional connection and this to the audience would be obscure which is always a good thing, this way they would get more detached. Also while we were performing since we could not see eachother, we would portray how we felt through our gestures and also whenever we had to speak in third person we would walk up to the stage and narrate, since I was also the singer who was used to pass time and also sings the words as he narrates the story, whenever we narrated we would walk to the front and in the middle of the stage, to break character. I actually enjoyed doing this performance, it was easier for me to do than the first time, but at the same time there's always room for improvement and I think I could have memorized my lines more and made my gestures more bigger to show how I felt.
At the beginning of the epic theatre unit, we were divided into two groups and were given pictures that symbolized an important point. In our group we had to look at these pictures and discuss what we thought they meant. There were two of the pictures that stood out to me, one was a picture of a mother and a daughter looking very sad and surrounding them was their home, by home I mean tents and houses made of carboard boxes and around them were piles of garabage that was polluting their environment. By looking at this pictures it made me realize the affect of the social classes the rich and the poor. There are so many poor people in the world yet people say they care but they don't do anything about this. To me actions speak louder than words, the only reason I would like to become rich is to give money to the poor and I don't need fancy cars, a house with 55 rooms to be happy in I just need the right and fair amount of money to keep a roof over my head and food on the table. That's what these people are asking for and it breaks my heart to see that there are so many of us that complain about how our lives are not good enough but it's nothing compared to what they go through. It's a pitty that there is even such a thing happening, it's evident that the rich does not care and will only give to the poor if they benefit from it I think, get a reward etc but isn't a reward seeing them smile and living a better life? that would be more than enough for me. Another picture that stood out was one where there was a vulture and a skinny african child on the floor crouching in the heat and the vulture just staring at him. This to me represented how the rich being the vulture is feeding on the poor and they don't realize how much they could help, but only realize and do so once it's too late. This picture really touched me, it just ashame what we let happen sometimes, it's unacceptable and everyday I hope that there's a solution to these kind of problems but the main one is for people to wake up, once they notice with their real eyes and realize what's happening maybe they will do something about it, however it's not always about seeing is believing, knowing that it's happening people should believe in it. Just the 'thought' of it even just makes me want to cry. Brecht's goal was to use social issues like this to portray to the audience what is really going on around them, since some people are just blinded by reality. He wants the audience to leave the theatre with that message in their heads knowing how it affects them and what they can do to make it better. After we looked at the photos we had to come up with a performance that demonstrated these problems, Asceal, Morcorm, Su yin and I came up with a scenario where there is a rich president and has a daughter that's also wealthy a poor shop keeper and a journalist. The president is interviewed by the journalist who is me, and asks questions about the economic crisis that the president just doesn't seem to care about. As the journalist it was a tough role to play, I think it was challenging to not get too attached to what I was doing and focus more on the point I was trying to prove which was that the rich people including the president does not care about the people and only himself. As an alienation device I would stand up and get out of character and narrate in third person about what the journalist thought about the president, it was a way of getting the audience to engage more and to not get too attached at the same time. His daughter goes shopping and meets a shop keeper and is very greedy to her since she is rich she thinks she can do anything, later they become friends and brings her home to the presidents house and realizes that there are so many poor people and that her dad the president has to do something about this problem. He first disagrees but later realizes that his people need him and solves the problem, depicting what people should really do and not just sit there and watch people die, everyone is born and because of that, they matter. I think we did a great job overall in trying to get the message across about the rich not caring about the poor. The difficulties I had would most probably be trying to get out of character quick enough to narrate, since I still found myself at times still being attached to who I was, as being the journalist. I also guess as a person it touches you and how sensitive you are to these things.
Another Brecht scene we had to do was from The Caucasian Chalk Circle where I played Grusha and Su yin played Simon. The Caucasian Circle was a play written by Brecht, it's two stories that come together in the end. Grusha, a kitchen maid, becomes engaged to a soldier named Simon. Soon thereafter, during the coup, she has Michael handed to her. She hides the child from the Fat Prince and his soldiers, thereby saving the child's life. In the caucasian circle the readers will notice that the characters names are very different and not what you would normally here nowadays, this was because some characters didn't even have proper names such as Fat Prince and was only named this way according to their rank and importance. People with more better names such as Grusha was most probably more important than the fat prince since she has an actual name instead of a description. We played the scene where Grusha has the baby and Simon finds out, we set the stage where I was on one side facing in a diagonal direction and the same for Simon on the other side, this way the audience will see we have no emotional connection and this to the audience would be obscure which is always a good thing, this way they would get more detached. Also while we were performing since we could not see eachother, we would portray how we felt through our gestures and also whenever we had to speak in third person we would walk up to the stage and narrate, since I was also the singer who was used to pass time and also sings the words as he narrates the story, whenever we narrated we would walk to the front and in the middle of the stage, to break character. I actually enjoyed doing this performance, it was easier for me to do than the first time, but at the same time there's always room for improvement and I think I could have memorized my lines more and made my gestures more bigger to show how I felt.
Brecht Quotes
IB THEATER QUOTES ON BRECHT & EPIC THEATER
BRECHT ON BEING A WRITER
“I am a playwright. I would actually like to have been a cabinetmaker, but of course you don’t earn enough doing that.”
Brecht is trying to imply that in the past he wanted to be a cabinetmaker, since maybe at the time they made more ‘money’ than I playwright did. However, now he realizes that because he is a playwright a cabinetmaker does not earn ‘enough’, materialistically in terms of money yes, but not in the case of being a playwright where you write and direct plays that make the audience question and think instead of it being an entertainment.
"Human beings go to the theatre in order to be swept away, captivated, impressed, uplifted, horrified, moved, kept in suspense, released, diverted, set free, set going, transplanted from their own time, and supplied with illusions. It is not an art at all unless it does so." “There is nothing so interesting on stage as a man trying to get a knot out of his shoelaces.”
Brecht quotes that most humans go to theatre expecting to be entertained and be blown away by performances, but Brecht believes that this is not real art. He thinks that a lot comes from just a man trying to get a knot out of his shoelaces, meaning Brecht uses a different style than most playwrights who usually hope to make the audience engage and get emotionally attached with the actors, however in Brecht’s case this is not what he tries to accomplish. He wants people to question the actions of the actors on stage, why they do certain things a specific way etc, because behind every action it symbolizes an important message that Brecht tries to convey through his actors and usually what he despises or recent events that occurred during that time ex. Capitalism.
BRECHT ON EPIC THEATRE
“The epic theatre is chiefly interested in the attitudes which people adopt towards one another, wherever they are socio-historically significant. It works out scenes where people adopt attitudes of such a sort that the social laws under which they are acting spring into sight. The concern of the epic theatre is thus eminently practical."
Brecht states that epic theatre is highly about the actors working together to portray a significant message to the audience to make them realize an issue that’s taking place and how serious it is, who it affects and how it affects them and what they can do about it, without getting emotionally attached to the actors, but changing the audience attitudes towards things. Brecht’s goal was to make the audience leave the room with them still thinking about the significance of the play, the purpose most of the time were social issues and how they can contribute to make it better.
BRECHT ON EMPATHY
“If in art an appeal is made to the emotions it means reason has to be switched off.”
Since Brecht did epic theatre which was different to dramatic theatre, in epic theatre the actors were not allowed to get expressively attached to their characters otherwise this will then enable the audience to also feel emotions when watching the performance which then leads to entertainment, this Brecht did not want. This quote refers to the actors and how art is made to be seen and the emotions are still present but sometimes have to get detached and not get too involved by playing the character that’s assigned.
BRECHT ON ART
“Art is not a mirror with which to reflect reality, but a hammer with which to shape it.”
Brecht uses art to symbolize his directing of a play. The art being the performance which does not always reflect about reality but rather uses the hammer being the actors and act as an ensemble to demonstrate the matter that is ongoing, all the things on stage helps to depict and form the vital message across to the audience.
BRECHT ON ACTORS
“Epic Theatre is an extremely artistic affair hardly thinkable without artists of virtuosity, imagination, humor and fellow-feeling.”
In epic theatre actors are not allowed to play their character in great depth that they get attached to it, but rather have characters with intelligence and imagination that can take on the challenge of them being this character that they have to be drawn away from most of the time and using gestures to portray what they want to depict rather than facial expressions, the actors have to use alienation devices to make a fourth wall between them and the audience in order for them not to engage too much.
Sunday, January 15, 2012
An Actors Encyclopedia
Most acting teachers will make students study and practice the ideas of Stanislavski since he was a great Russian director and acting teacher. The ideas and techniques he used will benefit students later on when acting or performing, it will give them more to think about when playing their characters. I think it was a good idea for Stanislavski to first let his actors observe and imitate other actors that worked on stage to comprehend of what is expected. He also created a book and recorded all his approaches to acting which I think is a great opportunity for actors to use and should take advantage of it and embrace new methods that will help them. What I realized about Stanislavski is that he is more focused on an actor's emotions since he believes that an actors ability to find emotional truth. He's attention towards his actors are their internal thoughts and feelings which bring them out to be real actors. Even though Stanislavski paid more attention to the emotional and mental aspect of acting, I appreciate him for also turning towards physical actions and vocal expression, which he considered reliable part in acting aswell. One of the directors called Lee Strasberg embraced Stanislavski's techniques and use it to work with actors and their emotional memory. I noticed members develop their own theories but at the same time continued to refer back to Stanislavski's techniques. I think it's important for directors to look for sources and ther things to benefit their actors on their improvement and help them with acting, to make it more believable for an audience. There are a list of terms which are commonly used today to help actors to acknowledge the term more and to get a better understanding of what it is and what is expected.
Acting: I agree with the statement that acting is the behaviour that is believable. In order for an audience to believe in what an actor is doing an actor must believe in themselves first. An audience will accept an act, if the actor knows what he is trying to accomplish or knows what he is doing to make it as believable as possible, an audience will believe anything aslong as the actor is portrayin it well with the right gestures and facial expressions. It's important for an actor to know their character well and get familiar with their surroundings inorder for them to carry out their role.
Actions: I think Actions are important they are a series of events that occur throughout a play, normally the significant events that happen for example a conflict. I believe it's important for an audience to have an understanding of the plot which is essential for an audience to follow an order so that they can keep up with the character. Following a characters characterization and analysing them is known as a journey, where the characters change from beginning to end by the look of their communication, physica actions and the way they respond and approach to certain situations. Actors should keep this term in mind, since it's vital for an audience to know when a character transitions from what they were into something different, so that it makes more sense and it will affect their surroundings aswell. When actors are acting on stage I suppose they should always have an objective in mind which reflect their needs and what their aim is, there should be bonds between actions and specific reasons as to why the actors are doing what they are assigned to do. Often in conflicts characters are trying to gain something from the other character. What I love about actions is the beauty of acting sometimes actors won't know what they are trying to pursue yet to the audience they create an illusion as if they know what they are doing.
Beginnings, middles and ends- When acting actors should follow a specific pattern to make the play more believeable. I think actors can differentiate a beginning from a middle and an end by for example having a freezing moment and then beginning the action or having an impulse to do the action, actors have to find the need to do something for a purpose. We all physically show what we are going to do and how we feel before speaking. An audience can always tell by physical movement what is expected to happen next.
Blocking- I consider this term to be one of the most important, since it can tell a lot about a character. When acting there are certain rules when playing characters. The audience has to be able to see the characters face, a character can turn at a 45 degree angle but not more than that, otherwise an audience would only have a view of a side profile which is not as powerful as seeing their actualy facial expressions. Whenever an actor turns their body immediately voice projection is lost. Physical action is also associated with blocking, it explains what type of person the character is like.
Character- I deem it's imperative for a person to know their characters inside and out. Internally by really focusing on the characters emotions and state of being, while externally portraying the characters with makeup and costume. Even if the actor is playing opposite to what they really are, it's important for them to research them or maybe even ask a person who has been in similar situations that your character is playing. With practice actors habitually inhabit their characters from head to toe, actors also have important choices to make when playing a character, asking questions like how would they feel if this happend etc.
Choices- I think this is a difficuly aspect to follow, for actors to constantly make choices for their character. In real life we make decisions for ourselves where as acting they have to make choices for how their character is like, their needs and wants. They need to make choices inorder to portray their character as best as possible for an audience to really get a feel of their character and can even maybe relate to them. Whenever I act, I always ask myself questions, which I think most actors do themselves too if they are unaware of what to do. Actors should be mostly influenced by positive choices.
Conflict- I believe conflicts always draw the attention of an audience towards the play more, the audience would too then get involved and also ask questions like what's going to happen next etc. They want to know more about what's going to happen next, they are asking for more. An audience is always interested in a climax or conflict between characters it garuntees them a play worth watching.
Emotional Memory/ Truth- I really love using this term in acting, because I do this myself and it really helps me. It's where when actors are not sure of the characters they are playing, they need to think or recall a memory of when they were for example sad or frustrated. It would bring back a lot of feelings and it would almost be as if you are reliving it all over again in the moment. But it's important not to just think about it emotionally but also how your body responded to the problem at that time. Actors have to find their emotions deep in themselves and it has to be honest and come from them and should be controlled through physical actions. It's tough for actors to focus on both physically and emotionally portraying their characters because usually we only think about the emotional state.
Gesture- Gestures are essential movements and I think are noteworthy for actors, every move they make it tells something about their character. It will confirm to the audience about a characters attitude and communications to other characters and also the surroundings they are placed in. With practice, gestures will become natural once your body inhabits the character, your body will just speak through gestures.
Given circumstances- Is significant because actors are always thrown with decisions and choices to make, which I think is a tough situation but as the actors progress into their characters it will just come naturally. There are different ways of saying or portraying certain actions for it to make sense. But with the help of the mood and setting it makes the choices much smaller.
The Magic If- I love this strategy of Stanislavski's technique. I always or try and do something similar to this. When an actor is having trouble knowing what their character will do next, they normally ask 'if' questions which I think is very clever and a suitable exercise. What would I do if I were to do this character in this situation. Actors always have to put themselves in someone elses shoes, to get what the character will do physically and emotionally. Also the magic if can help with making choices too.
Physical Actions- I believe physical actions say more about a character than vocal expression, because an audience can autmatically realize if something is wrong by the way the actor is expressing himself through thier body postures. It's always good to portray the action as best as you can, to make it clear to the audience what you're trying to do or say. Sometimes people exagorate the action but surely the actors will learn to control it.
Risk- Taking risks is what I think acting is all about, I believe it's a way of making acting more interesting yet challenging for actors. Some actors are left with big choices to decide upon. Watching a fascinating act will become more memorable to the audience and make them think more rather than just sitting and watching the entertainment. Actors have to do what's best for their character, even if they get stuck, they should improvise with other characters or their surroundings so it won't look awkward.
Sense Memory- I think it's essential to have a great imagination when acting on stage, because you never know what might be thrown at you. It's important to know your senses, taste, touch, smell and sight and you always have to be alert about when to use it on stage. Actors have to become very familiar with their senses inorder to expose what they're doing or feeling. For example cooking and smelling food, actors have to enhance the smell of deliciously cooked food. Rather than just making it up on the spot, it's better to use a personal memory of when you smelt, touched, heard or saw a certain things to make it easier on the actors, and a bold memory will certainly stick out. I think it's difficult for actors to try and communicate that to an audience and making it make sense at the same time.
Transition- This is where actors transition what they're doing from one thing to another and also how they feel from one emotion to another. I believe it's hard for actors to find the right moment to do so and also physicall transforming so it can be evident to the audience that it's taking place. Sometimes you really have to expand on the action inorder for the audience to see a transitional phrase happening. I think it's a great opportunity to show an audience who you were and what you're trying to become by expressing it through physical movement and emotionally. The rapid switch from one emotion to another sensation will also draw in the characters. I find this really hard to do, because I need to think about what my character will do next and actors just have to go with the flow and do it straight away without thinking about it too much, actors have to be part of their characters always, to make it easier on them to do certain things. The playwrights intentions should be well understood to adapt choice making skills.
Acting: I agree with the statement that acting is the behaviour that is believable. In order for an audience to believe in what an actor is doing an actor must believe in themselves first. An audience will accept an act, if the actor knows what he is trying to accomplish or knows what he is doing to make it as believable as possible, an audience will believe anything aslong as the actor is portrayin it well with the right gestures and facial expressions. It's important for an actor to know their character well and get familiar with their surroundings inorder for them to carry out their role.
Actions: I think Actions are important they are a series of events that occur throughout a play, normally the significant events that happen for example a conflict. I believe it's important for an audience to have an understanding of the plot which is essential for an audience to follow an order so that they can keep up with the character. Following a characters characterization and analysing them is known as a journey, where the characters change from beginning to end by the look of their communication, physica actions and the way they respond and approach to certain situations. Actors should keep this term in mind, since it's vital for an audience to know when a character transitions from what they were into something different, so that it makes more sense and it will affect their surroundings aswell. When actors are acting on stage I suppose they should always have an objective in mind which reflect their needs and what their aim is, there should be bonds between actions and specific reasons as to why the actors are doing what they are assigned to do. Often in conflicts characters are trying to gain something from the other character. What I love about actions is the beauty of acting sometimes actors won't know what they are trying to pursue yet to the audience they create an illusion as if they know what they are doing.
Beginnings, middles and ends- When acting actors should follow a specific pattern to make the play more believeable. I think actors can differentiate a beginning from a middle and an end by for example having a freezing moment and then beginning the action or having an impulse to do the action, actors have to find the need to do something for a purpose. We all physically show what we are going to do and how we feel before speaking. An audience can always tell by physical movement what is expected to happen next.
Blocking- I consider this term to be one of the most important, since it can tell a lot about a character. When acting there are certain rules when playing characters. The audience has to be able to see the characters face, a character can turn at a 45 degree angle but not more than that, otherwise an audience would only have a view of a side profile which is not as powerful as seeing their actualy facial expressions. Whenever an actor turns their body immediately voice projection is lost. Physical action is also associated with blocking, it explains what type of person the character is like.
Character- I deem it's imperative for a person to know their characters inside and out. Internally by really focusing on the characters emotions and state of being, while externally portraying the characters with makeup and costume. Even if the actor is playing opposite to what they really are, it's important for them to research them or maybe even ask a person who has been in similar situations that your character is playing. With practice actors habitually inhabit their characters from head to toe, actors also have important choices to make when playing a character, asking questions like how would they feel if this happend etc.
Choices- I think this is a difficuly aspect to follow, for actors to constantly make choices for their character. In real life we make decisions for ourselves where as acting they have to make choices for how their character is like, their needs and wants. They need to make choices inorder to portray their character as best as possible for an audience to really get a feel of their character and can even maybe relate to them. Whenever I act, I always ask myself questions, which I think most actors do themselves too if they are unaware of what to do. Actors should be mostly influenced by positive choices.
Conflict- I believe conflicts always draw the attention of an audience towards the play more, the audience would too then get involved and also ask questions like what's going to happen next etc. They want to know more about what's going to happen next, they are asking for more. An audience is always interested in a climax or conflict between characters it garuntees them a play worth watching.
Emotional Memory/ Truth- I really love using this term in acting, because I do this myself and it really helps me. It's where when actors are not sure of the characters they are playing, they need to think or recall a memory of when they were for example sad or frustrated. It would bring back a lot of feelings and it would almost be as if you are reliving it all over again in the moment. But it's important not to just think about it emotionally but also how your body responded to the problem at that time. Actors have to find their emotions deep in themselves and it has to be honest and come from them and should be controlled through physical actions. It's tough for actors to focus on both physically and emotionally portraying their characters because usually we only think about the emotional state.
Gesture- Gestures are essential movements and I think are noteworthy for actors, every move they make it tells something about their character. It will confirm to the audience about a characters attitude and communications to other characters and also the surroundings they are placed in. With practice, gestures will become natural once your body inhabits the character, your body will just speak through gestures.
Given circumstances- Is significant because actors are always thrown with decisions and choices to make, which I think is a tough situation but as the actors progress into their characters it will just come naturally. There are different ways of saying or portraying certain actions for it to make sense. But with the help of the mood and setting it makes the choices much smaller.
The Magic If- I love this strategy of Stanislavski's technique. I always or try and do something similar to this. When an actor is having trouble knowing what their character will do next, they normally ask 'if' questions which I think is very clever and a suitable exercise. What would I do if I were to do this character in this situation. Actors always have to put themselves in someone elses shoes, to get what the character will do physically and emotionally. Also the magic if can help with making choices too.
Physical Actions- I believe physical actions say more about a character than vocal expression, because an audience can autmatically realize if something is wrong by the way the actor is expressing himself through thier body postures. It's always good to portray the action as best as you can, to make it clear to the audience what you're trying to do or say. Sometimes people exagorate the action but surely the actors will learn to control it.
Risk- Taking risks is what I think acting is all about, I believe it's a way of making acting more interesting yet challenging for actors. Some actors are left with big choices to decide upon. Watching a fascinating act will become more memorable to the audience and make them think more rather than just sitting and watching the entertainment. Actors have to do what's best for their character, even if they get stuck, they should improvise with other characters or their surroundings so it won't look awkward.
Sense Memory- I think it's essential to have a great imagination when acting on stage, because you never know what might be thrown at you. It's important to know your senses, taste, touch, smell and sight and you always have to be alert about when to use it on stage. Actors have to become very familiar with their senses inorder to expose what they're doing or feeling. For example cooking and smelling food, actors have to enhance the smell of deliciously cooked food. Rather than just making it up on the spot, it's better to use a personal memory of when you smelt, touched, heard or saw a certain things to make it easier on the actors, and a bold memory will certainly stick out. I think it's difficult for actors to try and communicate that to an audience and making it make sense at the same time.
Transition- This is where actors transition what they're doing from one thing to another and also how they feel from one emotion to another. I believe it's hard for actors to find the right moment to do so and also physicall transforming so it can be evident to the audience that it's taking place. Sometimes you really have to expand on the action inorder for the audience to see a transitional phrase happening. I think it's a great opportunity to show an audience who you were and what you're trying to become by expressing it through physical movement and emotionally. The rapid switch from one emotion to another sensation will also draw in the characters. I find this really hard to do, because I need to think about what my character will do next and actors just have to go with the flow and do it straight away without thinking about it too much, actors have to be part of their characters always, to make it easier on them to do certain things. The playwrights intentions should be well understood to adapt choice making skills.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Pitch
Taken from the music piece Mussorgsky, the section becomes more than just a sound to your ears but transforms and emerges into a “Tough Love” situation. A state of affairs that examines between love, trust and betrayal, three very strong but diverse emotions. These powerful sensations sometimes work against and from time to time toil together. “Tough Love” will certainly magnetize those who have encountered struggles involving trickery and despondency. The word ‘tough’ definitely applies to those who can take on a gripping journey.
Partakers in “Tough Love” should be ready to protect their fragile hearts and well-informed minds to fight against despair and hatred. Participants must be prepared to face the challenges, when things are not as they appear to be sending emotions intertwining causing relationships to disrupt between loved and close ones. In pursuit of the piece of Othello by the one and only William Shakespeare, following the story’s outline and reoccurring themes of tragedy and jealousy, which occurs within a married couple and close friends. One who’s sly will find a way to change another’s mind with the help of his engaging talk and fiddly strategies. The puppet master has his connections on his fingertips and has the potential to turn things from superior to dire, by just the adjustment of appearance, to alter things his way.
“Tough Love” is an example of the use of the natural world and how humans perceive things at times, which aren’t always true. With one poisoning and toying with bonds, the final result could be lethal and could remain having a taste their own medicine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)