May 4, 2020
The feeling of information overload
leads to not wanting to add to it.
How to advertise for quiet in the midst of noise
The problem with the signal and noise metaphor is that there’s not any room for silence.
And it’s not cause it’s easy or that quiet reflects my inside
I think about form because it’s my only hope
And yet the site of my resistance
The minimal viable structure / container
Constraints and availability create conditions > Conditions shape what is able to emerge.
The Given Conditions:
“The actors must make an initial examination of the text to gather information about their characters’ situation, relationships, history and physical characteristics. This material is used as a baseline for all further character development. In addition, the actors are encouraged to consider how the details of the production, such as mise en scène, sets, lighting, costumes and properties, affect the characters’ psychology and actions.” LINK
We are encouraged to play the conditions.
A basic principle of performance
that works across style.
In dramatic work, the actor imagines the conditions of the character and brings those into their performance, along with (to varying degrees) the conditions of production.
Traditions like the Viewpoints are alternatives to this which trained performers to care for the space and time of the stage as a whole and to understand themselves as part of a larger piece.
And that emerged out of Judson Church scene and task based compositions – where the conditions could be simply the task and your reality in that day.
Which was connected to John Cage, Merce Cunningham and Robert Rauschenberg who were using chance and coincidence to create unpredictable conditions – that the performers would to a degree, not “play” in order that the juxtapositions and collisions might be visible. And on the Robert Wilson / Richard Foreman end, the conditions are the rules / actions set by the director and the task is to inhabit those conditions.
In the UK there is a history of acting as craft and form that expects actors to be more aware of legibility and meta concerns of the theatre.
In the extreme imagination of US theatre, the director is solely responsible for caretaking the audience perspective and needs – sight lines, audibility, legibility of choices – and the actor is focused on characters conditions available is the script. That analysis might stretch to historical analysis and contexts not in the text depending on the budget and interests of the team.
There are good reasons for this from film — the screen actor is trying desperately to hide the truth of their conditions. The gaffers, lights, hours in makeup, fatigue, etc…
Camera / audience awareness is a rare gimmick, and usually in character.
In those conditions, a performance approach of falling deeply into the character is an understandable reaction.
Moved onto the stage… well, that’s not why I go to the theatre
If I want screen acting and screen writing, I’ll watch a screen.
Theatre is something different
“Now more than ever”
We know, with all of ourselves,
when we are with other people
And also we know, with all of ourselves,
When the people we are with are paying attention to us.
There are clues in the 5 mainstream senses – visual and audio, of course, pheromones and scents, brushes and bumps against actual bodies, the taste overpriced wine and Hagendas bars – all tell me I’m at a theatre with other people.
And that move past the lobby.
In the room of the performance those sense are still live – though we mostly discourage touching, smelling or tasting the actors.
The performances I love most, whether through intimacy of venue or design of approach, the potential is, if not realized, more present.
Other senses are even more important in knowing that we know each other are present.
The gut, the back of the neck, the hot ears, the magnetic and gravitational fields. Maybe these are an expanded notion of touch.
Most theatre, I wager and in my experience, doesn’t optimize for this sense.
The theatre I love does.
Most theatre has, since Wagner turned off the house lights, tried to find ways to minimize the sense of knowing that we’re together in favour of a focused attention on the genius happening on the stage.
The lights are an obvious target – bright and tight on the performer, even the rest of the stage disappears to audience and actor.
The audience is the only one who can see and they see only what the show wants them to see. The actor, because she is human, knows through all her sense that there is a group of people there, but she’s can’t see them as a whole or individually.
The lights are just an expression of the philosophical position.
The forth wall has been wrapped around the heart and mind of the actor.
She may know that other people are around her on stage and off. But she has been directed not to see them anyways, to spend most of her acting energy on pretending that the current conditions are different.
Which is part of the craft – the ability to believe. A muscle that actors train. And it’s a great skill. But when applied consistently it leads to Deadly theatre.
If I want to be ignored by great actors telling character based stories, I will stay home and watch a screen. And if I want to do that with a group of people in a focused setting, I’ll go to the cinema.
When the straight theatre needs a high horse to climb up on, despite so much time masking and minimizing the actual conditions, they talk about the shared experience, while offering less than the cinema.
Options for theatre:
We tell different stories:
A) The same way (4th wall wrapped / predicable and character obsessed)
B) Slightly different Ways (connected to the audience, flexible and changing, contextually aware.)
C-ZZ) Lots of other options that aren’t those 2.
My friend Frank told me that hockey players were coach to say, “Of course” after all their obvious answers: “In the second period, of course, we hope to score a few more than the other team.”
This lets them off the hook.
In writing I fear I am saying obvious things all the time and try the same technique.