In the last post I mentioned Meisner, Stanislavsky and method. I'm not wanting to seem to be trendy or throwing around names of acting schools without understanding them so just a little here on what I meant. I know only a little about Strasberg, Meisner, Stansilavsky, Adler and some of the 20th century approaches to acting. And, for example, I'm not keen on apparently repititious meaningless exchanges as a way of learning to react (Meisner is well known for these exercises). At the level of theatre I work at we haven't time for weeks of exploration.
What is clear to me today is that if you are aware of modern theatre you can't help but be influenced by these schools and theories. The alternative is what I grew up with - the first few rehearsals are blocking (Stand here, move there, sit down, stand) followed by rehearsals which are tweaks of the first (sit in the middle of the line, put the gun there, say it with more passion).
What I want to see is something approaching genuine characters with motivations you can understand who move around for convincing reasons.
So I do use the blocking direction I grew up with but I have rudimentary and superficial but useful interpretations of these schools which inform my directorial style. I am drawn to what I understand from Meisner as the idea of trying to get actors in the now (what the repetition exercises are supposed to create). So that there performances are genuine in that they build from the energy and actors around them, and may differ from night to night but are motivations and reactions to others motivations. I think Meisner called this Affective Memory.
In Stanislavskly I like the idea of using imagination to understand where your character is and go with that. I mean for example neither of my actors playing Macbeth or Lady M have murdered or conspired to murder anyone as far as I am aware, so they need to imagine what it is like and go with that. Strasberg on the other hand (again as I understand it) wanted actors to draw on their own souls and psyches and reproduce their reactions to earlier events in their lives, or their psyches (I believe this is called emotion memory).
What I would say is each approach is useful for different actors. In other words where I can't get something out of an actor I may change approach. Some actors need to go back to when their pet rabbit died when they were 8 and use that to power their performance about losing a parent, another actor in the same role might simply imagine having lost his father to an assassin while a third may instead just get in the now and take on the enormity of what is being said.
I'm no expert. But I do like having a range of tools. As I eluded to earlier - our other issue is not having the luxury of spending 8 hours a day, every day, on this and not having necessarily the best material to work with. So when all else fails clever work-arounds (cheats) are really useful, that is if the actor can't stand without waving his hands around - get him to lean on things in every scene.
Showing posts with label miscellaneous. Show all posts
Showing posts with label miscellaneous. Show all posts
21 June 2008
26 April 2008
Audition packs
I've started the audition packs - these include background on the ideas I have for the production, how I want to audition people, and the excerpts from the play for the auditions.
Above all I want people to give the type of audition that reflects the way they work… they can read up and prepare looking at background and the script OR turn up cold. Part of the audition is to find out how they like to work and what sort of actor they are.
I have worked with people who start rehearsals as blank canvasses and others who turn up to the first rehearsal with most of the character in place. I've had with thinkers, intuitive actors, and others who are very physical in how they develop their characters. Some audition brilliantly and never get any better, most audition at one level and just get better. I have also worked with actors who give brilliant auditions and get worse. One woman I had in a show 11 years ago I never saw her get near her audition level .....
I'm a blank canvas - I come in with ideas but really try and learn the part as I go... so I start with thinking and listening to the Director and feeling the other actors and then let it happen intiuitively. Some years ago I was cast as Amadeus, and withdrew 2 and a half weeks into 8 weeks of rehearsals when the Director wanted to know why I wasn't fully in character yet.
Anyway enough war stories I will post the audition packs and the script here in the next two weeks.
Above all I want people to give the type of audition that reflects the way they work… they can read up and prepare looking at background and the script OR turn up cold. Part of the audition is to find out how they like to work and what sort of actor they are.
I have worked with people who start rehearsals as blank canvasses and others who turn up to the first rehearsal with most of the character in place. I've had with thinkers, intuitive actors, and others who are very physical in how they develop their characters. Some audition brilliantly and never get any better, most audition at one level and just get better. I have also worked with actors who give brilliant auditions and get worse. One woman I had in a show 11 years ago I never saw her get near her audition level .....
I'm a blank canvas - I come in with ideas but really try and learn the part as I go... so I start with thinking and listening to the Director and feeling the other actors and then let it happen intiuitively. Some years ago I was cast as Amadeus, and withdrew 2 and a half weeks into 8 weeks of rehearsals when the Director wanted to know why I wasn't fully in character yet.
Anyway enough war stories I will post the audition packs and the script here in the next two weeks.
17 March 2008
Washing your hands of it
Lady Macbeth Not Alone in Her Quest for Spotlessness
By BENEDICT CAREY NY Times
Liars, cheats, philanderers and murderers are not renowned for exquisite personal hygiene, but then no one has studied their showering habits. They may scrub extra hard after a con job, use $40 hyacinth shampoo after a secret tryst or book a weekend at a spa after a particularly ugly hit. They are human beings, after all, and if a study published last week is any guide, they feel a strong urge to wash their hands — literally — after a despicable act in an unconscious effort to ease their consciences. And it works, at least for minor guilt stains. People who washed their hands after contemplating an unethical act were less troubled by their thoughts than those who didn’t, the study found. “The association between moral and physical purity has been taken for granted for so long that it was startling that no one had ever shown empirical evidence of it,” said Chen-Bo Zhong, an author of the new research and a behavioral researcher at the University of Toronto. The study, which he wrote with Katie Liljenquist, a graduate student at Northwestern University, appeared in the journal Science. The researchers call this urge to clean up the “Macbeth effect,” after the scene in Shakespeare’s tragedy in which Lady Macbeth moans, “Out, damned spot! Out, I say!” after bloodying her hands when her husband, at her urging, murders King Duncan. In one of several experiments among Northwestern undergraduates, the researchers had one group of students recall an unethical act from their past, like betraying a friend, and another group reflect on an ethical deed, like returning lost money. Afterward, the students had their choice of a gift, either a pencil or an antiseptic wipe. Those who had reflected on a shameful act were twice as likely as the others to take the wipe. In another experiment, the researchers found that students who had been contemplating an unethical deed rated the value of cleaning products significantly higher than peers who had been thinking about an ethical act. Psychologists have known for years that when people betray their values, they feel a need to compensate. Christians who have read a blasphemous story about Jesus express a desire to go to church more frequently; social liberals who feel they have discriminated express an increased desire to volunteer for civil rights work. “It’s sometimes called symbolic cleansing, or moral cleansing, and it’s an attempt to repair moral identity,” said Dr. Philip Tetlock, a professor of organizational behavior at the University of California, Berkeley. Sure enough, Mr. Zhong and Ms. Liljenquist found that students who had been thinking about past sins were very likely to agree to volunteer their time to help with a graduate school project — unless they had been allowed to wash their hands, which cut their willingness to volunteer roughly in half. Several people known to have expressed guilt over spreading rumors were asked to comment for the record on the findings, but all declined. And efforts to contact hit men to inquire about personal hygiene were deemed unwise; none had publicists. But Macbeth was available for comment. Liev Schreiber, who played Macbeth to critical acclaim this summer at the Delacorte Theater in Central Park, said the moral weight of the murder in the play was exhausting. And he said that cast members lined up to shower at the theater, rather than waiting until they got home. “That was unusual — usually no one uses those theater showers,” Mr. Schreiber said in an interview. “I had to shower. I was covered in eight gallons of fake blood by the end.” He said he had no idea how much the cast’s cleansing was because of to the moral horror of the play and how much was because of the muggy summer weather. Either way, the Macbeths, by the last act, have fallen to pieces, physically and mentally, despite compulsive efforts to purge their sins. Mr. Zhong said in an interview that for this couple at least, all the kingdom’s washbasins were not enough to ease their consciences. But the murder of a king, he acknowledged, falls into a different category from the confessed sins of the undergraduates, which included shoplifting, lying and “kissing a married man.” “We do believe there might be limits to how well simple hand washing can clean your slate,” he said, “but it remains to be seen where that limit is.”
By BENEDICT CAREY NY Times
Liars, cheats, philanderers and murderers are not renowned for exquisite personal hygiene, but then no one has studied their showering habits. They may scrub extra hard after a con job, use $40 hyacinth shampoo after a secret tryst or book a weekend at a spa after a particularly ugly hit. They are human beings, after all, and if a study published last week is any guide, they feel a strong urge to wash their hands — literally — after a despicable act in an unconscious effort to ease their consciences. And it works, at least for minor guilt stains. People who washed their hands after contemplating an unethical act were less troubled by their thoughts than those who didn’t, the study found. “The association between moral and physical purity has been taken for granted for so long that it was startling that no one had ever shown empirical evidence of it,” said Chen-Bo Zhong, an author of the new research and a behavioral researcher at the University of Toronto. The study, which he wrote with Katie Liljenquist, a graduate student at Northwestern University, appeared in the journal Science. The researchers call this urge to clean up the “Macbeth effect,” after the scene in Shakespeare’s tragedy in which Lady Macbeth moans, “Out, damned spot! Out, I say!” after bloodying her hands when her husband, at her urging, murders King Duncan. In one of several experiments among Northwestern undergraduates, the researchers had one group of students recall an unethical act from their past, like betraying a friend, and another group reflect on an ethical deed, like returning lost money. Afterward, the students had their choice of a gift, either a pencil or an antiseptic wipe. Those who had reflected on a shameful act were twice as likely as the others to take the wipe. In another experiment, the researchers found that students who had been contemplating an unethical deed rated the value of cleaning products significantly higher than peers who had been thinking about an ethical act. Psychologists have known for years that when people betray their values, they feel a need to compensate. Christians who have read a blasphemous story about Jesus express a desire to go to church more frequently; social liberals who feel they have discriminated express an increased desire to volunteer for civil rights work. “It’s sometimes called symbolic cleansing, or moral cleansing, and it’s an attempt to repair moral identity,” said Dr. Philip Tetlock, a professor of organizational behavior at the University of California, Berkeley. Sure enough, Mr. Zhong and Ms. Liljenquist found that students who had been thinking about past sins were very likely to agree to volunteer their time to help with a graduate school project — unless they had been allowed to wash their hands, which cut their willingness to volunteer roughly in half. Several people known to have expressed guilt over spreading rumors were asked to comment for the record on the findings, but all declined. And efforts to contact hit men to inquire about personal hygiene were deemed unwise; none had publicists. But Macbeth was available for comment. Liev Schreiber, who played Macbeth to critical acclaim this summer at the Delacorte Theater in Central Park, said the moral weight of the murder in the play was exhausting. And he said that cast members lined up to shower at the theater, rather than waiting until they got home. “That was unusual — usually no one uses those theater showers,” Mr. Schreiber said in an interview. “I had to shower. I was covered in eight gallons of fake blood by the end.” He said he had no idea how much the cast’s cleansing was because of to the moral horror of the play and how much was because of the muggy summer weather. Either way, the Macbeths, by the last act, have fallen to pieces, physically and mentally, despite compulsive efforts to purge their sins. Mr. Zhong said in an interview that for this couple at least, all the kingdom’s washbasins were not enough to ease their consciences. But the murder of a king, he acknowledged, falls into a different category from the confessed sins of the undergraduates, which included shoplifting, lying and “kissing a married man.” “We do believe there might be limits to how well simple hand washing can clean your slate,” he said, “but it remains to be seen where that limit is.”
03 March 2008
Magic
What is it that makes Macbeth so special?
It's the shortest of the great Shakespearean tragedies. It is accessible and has no subplots.
It is the story of one man's fatal flaw and his decline from hero to hated villain. It's full of blood.
Of the posters I've reviewed I see crowns, blood and heroic warriors.
http://images.google.co.nz/images?hl=en&q=macbeth+poster&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2
I love this one:
http://images.google.co.nz/imgres?imgurl=http://admin.cru2.net/images/1184057953poster01_sml01.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.thebiggerpicture.biz/home.html&h=325&w=482&sz=70&hl=en&start=94&sig2=OG402Pp8afWk42oQVwFgQA&tbnid=bvCH7ajzfeE9DM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=129&ei=1aXLR8W4NZrWgQPHqeitCQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmacbeth%2Bposter%26start%3D80%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D20%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN
And Macbeth is full of magic.
In the late 1600s the witches scenes were increased, songs added, and they were made to fly on hoists. When Samuel Pepys saw Macbeth he described it as a musical.
For me the witches and the magic are a key factor in the success and allure of the show. I'm sure I have heard of a production where the witches were written out, although I can't locate it.
This is close and would have been entertaining for it's odd take: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE1DD1F3FF934A1575AC0A967958260
It's the shortest of the great Shakespearean tragedies. It is accessible and has no subplots.
It is the story of one man's fatal flaw and his decline from hero to hated villain. It's full of blood.
Of the posters I've reviewed I see crowns, blood and heroic warriors.
http://images.google.co.nz/images?hl=en&q=macbeth+poster&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2
I love this one:
http://images.google.co.nz/imgres?imgurl=http://admin.cru2.net/images/1184057953poster01_sml01.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.thebiggerpicture.biz/home.html&h=325&w=482&sz=70&hl=en&start=94&sig2=OG402Pp8afWk42oQVwFgQA&tbnid=bvCH7ajzfeE9DM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=129&ei=1aXLR8W4NZrWgQPHqeitCQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmacbeth%2Bposter%26start%3D80%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D20%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN
And Macbeth is full of magic.
In the late 1600s the witches scenes were increased, songs added, and they were made to fly on hoists. When Samuel Pepys saw Macbeth he described it as a musical.
For me the witches and the magic are a key factor in the success and allure of the show. I'm sure I have heard of a production where the witches were written out, although I can't locate it.
This is close and would have been entertaining for it's odd take: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE1DD1F3FF934A1575AC0A967958260
29 February 2008
Foul is foul
Torrential rain is forecast. Appropriately I'm going through the Macbeth Script and history to look for insights into the production.
The central problem today is reducing the script to 90 minutes. The complication is I don't know how long it is now. I've been hunting for estimated lengths. I do know I've seen two productions well over 2 hours.
Anyway back to the start.
I have always been fascinated by the Scottish Play. At drama classes when I was 12 we did sections of it. I studied it at school and university, I've seen many movie versions. I've paradied the play in essays and letters.
Three things prompted me to seek to direct the play now:
1 I was writing a play for a cafe and I wanted to turn the waitresses into the 3 witches.
2 My father died.
3 I was watching a play at a theatre that would lend itself to a production of it.
That theatre company had no slots till 2009 but Elmwood players did have a slot and when I went to suggest a comedy to them, I mentioned what I really wanted to do at some point was the Scottish Play.
And so 2 months later here we are.
What is amazing is how quickly the script has taken over my conscious thoughts. Many decisions about the production have already gone in ways I wouldn't have expected.
My intention here is to follow these decisions and then the production as it takes shape. The few equivalent discussions I have found on the web have been fascinating and I want to link to some of the key ones as I go. I also think leaving our record may be of interest to others. Or not. The one issue I have is to not have spoilers here that may take away from the living production.
As I progress I would like to invite those involved in the production to join the blog and share their decisions and observations.
The central problem today is reducing the script to 90 minutes. The complication is I don't know how long it is now. I've been hunting for estimated lengths. I do know I've seen two productions well over 2 hours.
Anyway back to the start.
I have always been fascinated by the Scottish Play. At drama classes when I was 12 we did sections of it. I studied it at school and university, I've seen many movie versions. I've paradied the play in essays and letters.
Three things prompted me to seek to direct the play now:
1 I was writing a play for a cafe and I wanted to turn the waitresses into the 3 witches.
2 My father died.
3 I was watching a play at a theatre that would lend itself to a production of it.
That theatre company had no slots till 2009 but Elmwood players did have a slot and when I went to suggest a comedy to them, I mentioned what I really wanted to do at some point was the Scottish Play.
And so 2 months later here we are.
What is amazing is how quickly the script has taken over my conscious thoughts. Many decisions about the production have already gone in ways I wouldn't have expected.
My intention here is to follow these decisions and then the production as it takes shape. The few equivalent discussions I have found on the web have been fascinating and I want to link to some of the key ones as I go. I also think leaving our record may be of interest to others. Or not. The one issue I have is to not have spoilers here that may take away from the living production.
As I progress I would like to invite those involved in the production to join the blog and share their decisions and observations.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
