Write at least 1 paragraph (4 sentences or more) responding to 1
of the questions below. Then write at least 1 paragraph responding to
another student's response to 1 of the questions.
Questions from Chapter 21:
1.
"But as an actress who has a great deal of experience elsewhere, I resented acting with some of the principals used at the Group Theatre." At one time or another we feel that we are more skilled and resent or blow off what we are taught in the theatre. Describe a theatre experience when you learned to build upon something you already knew or were surprised how well you knew the information.
2.
"He explained in detail how important it was to use circumstances. He said where you are is what you are, and how you are, and what you can be. You're in a place that will feed you, give you strength, give you the ability to do whatever you want." I suppose this is why I prefer sets that are as realistic as possible; as an actor I want to be immersed in the show. Give an example of a time when your location (according to the script) dictated what you did in your performance.
3.
"In one scene of the play Stanislavski's character talked to the people and asked them to do something. That was wrong. He said, 'I had to speak to the soul of the people. If I could reach their souls, I could get somewhere.' Ten years after Stanislavski originally played the role, the play was revived; the part was his and now he could play it." Reflect on a past performance and describe one thing you did on stage, why it was "wrong," and what you would do differently to be able to reclaim that part of the performance if you were going to do it again.
4. "The truth is big -- don't tear it down. We want to hear Mr. Ibsen, not you." Describe a time when your performance wasn't as successful because it was more you than the character the author intended.
5. "As an actor you have to find a way to analyze the outside world to give it value. Trust me, it's there. You must be fed from the outside. If you feed only from yourself, you're pathological." Explain what Stella Adler mean by this.
2) In Fiddler on the Roof, my character Golde spent most of her time in or around her house. The scene that stands out to me is during "Sabath Prayer". Golde and Tevye stand together at one side of the table and all of the other members sit on the sides. The set was fairly simple, but the elements that were there created the whole room. There was some sort of a counter with cabinets where the nicer eating utensils were kept, a wooden basket for carrying dirty clothes, and of course the long wooden table with two tall candels and a challah in the middle waiting to be blessed. The lighting was dim, so that Golde and Tevye's faces were the only ones really visible. It created a very homey kind of sacred environment. This scene really helped me to feel in character because it felt like a place of belonging. A big part of Fiddler on the Roof is centered around the home and the traditions that are kept there. In the end they are foreced to leave their Anatevka and it is easily seen how much love the people had for their little town. The set in my house helped me to show that love throughout the play.
ReplyDeleteI agree and I love how you put it. In that set there was clearly elements of it that added to that idea of "tradition," and the entire set had the feeling of something old and rich in history. That home felt like a place where your entire family had been raised, and where your father was raised, and your grandfather before him. So it's natural for there to be a sacredness and homeyness to it all, because there really does feel like there's some sacred tradition driving everything that occurs in that house.
Delete4. I think my least favorite performance that I've ever done was "Night of the Living Dead". That performance was almost all me and not the character, and I'm not afraid to admit that. I found it difficult to connect to that character for a multitude of reasons, including my set and being tethered to the stage by a too short mic chord. The character, I would even say, was completely absent and therefore my performance suffered.
ReplyDeleteYeah.. Plus a crappy script. However, You could have taken your environment and added traits that would be implied or copied a television or radio persona of the era after a little research. I'm sure you obviously know that though. I don't think the play suffered at all from your performance at all though. Even if it was Melanie, it was good.
DeleteI agree with Evan that 1) the play didn't suffer and 2) you could have used/focused on your environment more. When there are not a lot of lines for your character you have to use your environment and respond to that. How would your character act in that situation? Even if your in an empty room you still react to your situation.
Delete1. This assignment is a perfect example of this. After reading it, I'd say 80-90% of information in this book consists of things I've already learned either in my two times going to New York, or from the thespian festival, or from various other accumulations of knowledge. This is still great though, because it reinforces the things I do know, and I find occasional little nuggets of gold about things I didn't or hadn't thought about. I find that there's no time wasted in learning and reinforcing learning, because there's always more to attain.
ReplyDeleteEven though I may have the least acting experience, I do agree with you. I believe that I have even heard of many of the things the book has said. Some of the things are kinda obvious, and some of the things I've learned from watching the performances of others and actually watching more musicals in my free time.
DeleteAbsolutely. It is impossible for one person to know everything about any topic. Especially one as broad as acting. There are a billion techniques and nobody is going to be good at everyone. The same can be said for people you audition for. No one person is going to like or want the same qualities as another. That's why immersing yourself in as much knowledge as you can is an amazing thing.
DeleteAndrew- Absolutely agree with you. There were indeed little things in the book that I've learned in the past but shined itself in a different light. There were times where I would just be like, "Oh, that's a different perspective/outlook than I've been looking at it." It's amazing how there are so many oppritunities to learn new things in things you already know.
Delete4)One thing I pride myself on is trying to create different characters for every show. That didn't really start occuring for me until I worked with Bianco theatre company and Live Theatre Workshop. Before that, I played myself too much. I could complain that I did it too much in "High School Musical", but there's not that much to the part. Instead, I'll talk about Aladdin. I thought I did well vocally and being charismatic. However, it was more a story about myself. The mannerisms were my own. It wasn't as much what I did like me in this case though. It was more what I didn't portray for Aladdin. It's one part that honestly does keep me up at night. I wish I could redeem myself.
ReplyDelete4. There hasn't really been a show where I was myself instead of my character. However that maybe because i've only been in one show really, but there were many times during rehersals where I was just kinda there. And because of that I don't think that I did as well as I could have in some of the scenes.
ReplyDeleteOH MY GOSH. So my sophomore year, we went to Amphi High for the Amphi Festival. (For those in intermediate/advanced drama last year, that was hosted at our school last year.) And there was one thing that freaked me out. Normally during the beginning of the school year, Canalia likes to teach us kind of the little fundamentals that include the presentation, (name , name of the piece, who it was written by, getting in to character, performing, getting out of character, and saying thank you), articulation, gestures, backs to the audience, etc which were drilled into our heads freshman year in Beginning Drama. And so my sophomore year I thought that those things were kind of stupid, but I tried to make sure to do them anyway. So back to the story, at the Festival, I was almost annoyed at the fact that I saw backs to the audience and lack of presentation by the performances from CDO and Amphi. I almost felt stuck-up in the sense, but I think that is kind of a good thing. Just the fact that these little things made such a huge difference to me was astonishing.
ReplyDelete4.) I did a monologue this past year that I was very, very, VERY displeased with myself over because of this very issue. I had it memorized, blocked, and rehearsed, so the problem was not in the fundamentals. I was not connecting to the character in what I considered to be a sufficiently understanding way (the monologue was from "The Tempest" when Caliban is screaming at Prospero). So when I did it on stage, I felt quite a bit more like I was simply standing up there screaming and wailing as opposed to the character I was trying to portray. I guess I pulled it off from the audience's point of view, but I was extremely disappointed in myself. I should've either worked on it harder until I figured it out or picked a different monologue, but the product I presented was far below the quality that I typically want to bring onto the stage. Shakespeare's character was misrepresented, and the proper amount of pain, sorrow, and hatred were not in the performance (I got the craziness part down though. Whoopdee frikkin doo). It's an experience I would love never to replicate.
ReplyDeleteYeah, the soliloquy was not up to your usual standard. But now that you have played with different aspects of creating your performance (or sometimes not) you will become a more successful on stage.
DeleteFirst off, it's good that you can recognize when you haven't done your best. Like, A+ because I don't think a lot of people can do that and it's good that you can do that. Anyway, this is a really good example of how not connecting to your character can screw up an entire monologue, scene, etc. When you can't connect, it's all sort of disjointed, and it just doesn't feel right (aka how I felt during that one boiling oil scene). You're right Keenan- you feel like you're just standing up there screaming, or talking, not actually acting. Connection to a character is just as important as the research and the costume.
DeleteLike Katie said, it's great that you can look at a performance you've done and see when you're not doing your best. That means you can correct any problems you or the judges had with your performance, and do better the next time you perform it. That's a great thing for an actor to be able to do. Sadly, it seems like not a lot of people can or are willing to see the flaws in their performances, so again, it's great that you can.
Delete5. This has become really important to me lately, actually. I have to remind myself to stop and smell the roses, so-to-say. When I'm driving, or walking, or sitting next to the window, I'll take time to look at the sky, the clouds, and how amazing it all is. And most of us just walk under it, not really noticing it at all. And I feel great when I do this, appreciating the value in the world and objects around me. I agree with Stella that if people don't do this, they become sickly, feeding off their vanity or pride. It does a person good to stop and really look at something (heck, even someone) and evaluate its value. It starts to give you a different perspective on something, which is important to acting. As Ms. Adler says, you have to portray all different kinds of point of view.
ReplyDeleteThis is something I rant about primarily with musicians. A musician connects to their audience through music (duh). However in order to be in a position where they can supply the music and actually get it to the people it's designed for, they have to write, communicate, think, compose, basically do all of the things that are necessary to make really good music, and then take it a step further by being unique and fundamentally better than their peers. In all of this, where is the material coming from? The person has dedicated their lives to making music, and therefore, they can only write with any knowledge about making music. So, unless they're writing for other musicians, they cannot possibly connect to their audiences. Similarly, like Katie said we need to present all different points of view, but if all we understand or are enveloped with is acting, then the only people we can truly connect to is other actors. It's a fairly straightforward albeit generalizing idea, and of course there will be exceptions, but if we do not connect to the rest of the world then when we really need to on stage, the fuel will not be there.
DeleteI think that as Stella explains people have become so used to this idea of immediate gratification. We decide we want something and we expect to get it then and there. Two days ago I went hiking on Mount Lemmon with my dad and a few of his friends. Not to get too philosophical, but being up there was really a great experience. You realize how much bigger the world is than you and it’s rather humbling. You also realize how wild the world really is. We have tamed everything even down to things like the wooden pegs on the table compared to the pegs on the table in Versailles. Its seems that idea of immediate gratification has taken away so much value from our world. I agree with Katie and with Stella Adler that its important that we search for that value—as actors and as people. As actors we can use that value to fuel how we perform. I think it’s that value that gives performances depth and meaning. Learning to appreciate it in the real world, only makes it easier to show it onstage. (apologies if that was difficult to understand)
Delete4. Last year in Beauty and the Beast I was at one point a plate. Well, to some extent playing a plate is easy because as we’ve talked about before, the physicality of the plate dictates how I should act. However, on the other end of that, a plate is an intimate object and so as an actor my job was to show that the plate is/was a human and has human emotions and ideas. I found it difficult trying to create a true character for the plate in a way that wasn’t just Makenna. Also, I don’t think I did a very good job of reminding myself that the plate was a unique individual with a personality and as I said human characteristics. I kept resorting to what I thought a servant would do in the castle. I didn’t become my character like I should have. Transitioning off and on stage between essentially three different characters didn’t make being a plate any easier either. Anyway, the author intended for this character to have her own ambitions and desires and I think I lost that onstage.
ReplyDelete2. In Night of the Living Dead, for pretty much all of the play, we were trapped in a house surrounded by hungry zombies. The zombies would constantly be swarming in front of the house, and would claw at the front door and front window, trying to get into the house so they could eat us. This helped to give the play a sense of horror and tension. This also helped us develop a mindset of "oh man, we have to do something or we are going to die". Because there was this constant threat of being devoured alive by zombies, it pushed our characters to come up with plans to escape and/or survive, because they were terrified of the zombies.
ReplyDelete