Sunday 29 May 2016
Saturday 28 May 2016
.jpg)
Wednesday 25 May 2016
memorization problems
I'm curious about why I'm having such a relatively tough time remembering lines and lyrics this term. And learning them, to an extent. I feel totally useless when I go to learn lines-- nothing sticks and I feel very foggy when I do so.
I feel tired ALL THE TIME but especially after 7pm, when I (finally) have time to learn and review lines. It makes it all more difficult too. But maybe that's what I mean by "foggy?" Like when you yawn a dozen times in a row because your poor brain just needs a ton of oxygen all of a sudden. But I can't even get myself to yawn a dozen times-- I just slowly melt into a puddle of half-lines and paraphrases, like a little match girl falling asleep in a snowbank. It's warm somehow, filled with an oddly comforting sense of complacent resignation...
Except of course I simply NEED to retain all of this, as well as find time for reading, research, practicing, doing laundry, cleaning my toilets... You know, all the other things in life that seem to fall away by accident because time flies faster than I can keep up.
It makes my brain hurt.
I feel tired ALL THE TIME but especially after 7pm, when I (finally) have time to learn and review lines. It makes it all more difficult too. But maybe that's what I mean by "foggy?" Like when you yawn a dozen times in a row because your poor brain just needs a ton of oxygen all of a sudden. But I can't even get myself to yawn a dozen times-- I just slowly melt into a puddle of half-lines and paraphrases, like a little match girl falling asleep in a snowbank. It's warm somehow, filled with an oddly comforting sense of complacent resignation...
Except of course I simply NEED to retain all of this, as well as find time for reading, research, practicing, doing laundry, cleaning my toilets... You know, all the other things in life that seem to fall away by accident because time flies faster than I can keep up.
It makes my brain hurt.
Tuesday 24 May 2016
quitting godspell
I quit Godspell. It doesn't feel like much because I can't say it felt like I was even in it to begin with. I never received a script, despite multiple and frequent requests. And what's a few hours spent discussing options and plans? What losses Drew and I have amassed are mostly financial-- I think we can kiss goodbye our investment, which wasn't exactly a small amount, but it's a good lesson and it is what it is. And I guess I've lost my personal relationships with a few people who I guess weren't friends anyway-- heaven knows I'm certainly not shooting myself in the foot professionally by losing them.
What I've learned from this experience--
1. It is hard to undertake a professional project with friends. I will always do more research and consideration before jumping in, especially if it involves my own money. I have learned I'm actually good at keeping business separate from friendship, but not everyone is. Especially, it seems, Type A personalities who have the same training as me but a much higher opinion of themselves compared to everyone else.
2. Steer clear of putting myself in a position to be taken advantage of. I have many strengths and previous experiences that are valuable-- in this specific case, having been to the Fringe twice as an actor and director. I also know people who are supportive and in a position to financially support projects. And, lest I don't give myself this credit, I'm also a decent actor and singer. But none of these things are worth being taken advantage of by someone who doesn't value me in the core of it. My experience and connections were being used to further someone else's ego. I don't need to work with people who see me as a way to simply further themselves.
3. It's ok to unload my plate. I don't need to make any excuses for myself. I'm looking out for myself and my family. I did all I could to not let anyone down, but I now know that it's ok to responsibly step back from something if it's in my best interest. As a mere actor in this specific project, who could "be replaced" and whose involvement didn't ultimately matter because "this project will happen if I have to do a one-man show, period, full stop," I can step away in good conscience. People in our profession back out of projects all the time. While there are always consequences, which one must be prepared for, in this case, the benefits outweigh the consequences by a long shot. I can't feel bad for choosing my MFA and my family over a project that wasn't worth the effort in comparison. And that's ok.
4. The benefits of stepping away are: being able to focus on school during this term that has been a tough one for me and during which too much of my time was going to be devoted to an extracurricular activity; being able to focus on my research this summer instead of give any time to someone who didn't necessarily find much value in her own research and therefore has loud opinions about everyone else's research; having time to go home to be with my family, attend my cousin's wedding and my great-aunt's memorial; having time with my future step-children, especially having been gone the last 10 months, learning to be a step mother and define my role in the extended family; and planning a wedding to marry the most supportive, sweet, wonderful partner, without whom I wouldn't be in England or in this programme I am enjoying so much.
Quitting that project was the best idea.
What I've learned from this experience--
1. It is hard to undertake a professional project with friends. I will always do more research and consideration before jumping in, especially if it involves my own money. I have learned I'm actually good at keeping business separate from friendship, but not everyone is. Especially, it seems, Type A personalities who have the same training as me but a much higher opinion of themselves compared to everyone else.
2. Steer clear of putting myself in a position to be taken advantage of. I have many strengths and previous experiences that are valuable-- in this specific case, having been to the Fringe twice as an actor and director. I also know people who are supportive and in a position to financially support projects. And, lest I don't give myself this credit, I'm also a decent actor and singer. But none of these things are worth being taken advantage of by someone who doesn't value me in the core of it. My experience and connections were being used to further someone else's ego. I don't need to work with people who see me as a way to simply further themselves.
3. It's ok to unload my plate. I don't need to make any excuses for myself. I'm looking out for myself and my family. I did all I could to not let anyone down, but I now know that it's ok to responsibly step back from something if it's in my best interest. As a mere actor in this specific project, who could "be replaced" and whose involvement didn't ultimately matter because "this project will happen if I have to do a one-man show, period, full stop," I can step away in good conscience. People in our profession back out of projects all the time. While there are always consequences, which one must be prepared for, in this case, the benefits outweigh the consequences by a long shot. I can't feel bad for choosing my MFA and my family over a project that wasn't worth the effort in comparison. And that's ok.
4. The benefits of stepping away are: being able to focus on school during this term that has been a tough one for me and during which too much of my time was going to be devoted to an extracurricular activity; being able to focus on my research this summer instead of give any time to someone who didn't necessarily find much value in her own research and therefore has loud opinions about everyone else's research; having time to go home to be with my family, attend my cousin's wedding and my great-aunt's memorial; having time with my future step-children, especially having been gone the last 10 months, learning to be a step mother and define my role in the extended family; and planning a wedding to marry the most supportive, sweet, wonderful partner, without whom I wouldn't be in England or in this programme I am enjoying so much.
Quitting that project was the best idea.
Wednesday 18 May 2016
thoughts on singing and acting class
Having and recovering from laryngitis has been an interesting challenge this term, particularly because I have been so encouraged by my progress in my voice work during my time at BSA. I have felt like I have some kind of breakthrough every week in one class or another-- until it came to a crashing halt in being ill, but more frustratingly in recovering from the worst of it. It's been weeks, yet I feel like I'm still not back 100%. The good news is I'm quite well enough to have started making some progress again (though not in singing, the way I'd like to be able to)-- but I'm annoyed at my body for not being able to work faster!
With singing, as of this week, I'm realizing and accepting that I'm especially good at golden age and art musicals. I have wanted to be good at contemporary MT and belting-- and I am, for character roles especially-- but it's not my strength. And that's very ok. I need to find a way to sing contemporary pieces and shows in a way that suits my voice but without needing to do things that compare me to anyone else. Golden age and art MT interests me more anyway. So why not emphasize that for myself-- and find a way to sing that style in any genre.
We're working through our scenes for acting class today-- stopping and starting with Alex asking questions and giving direction. Rachael and Robert have been working for about 45 minutes, but they'e only made it through about a page of the scene. What I'm observing is a feeling I've had all year, which I've been able to push aside to focus on my own work, but it is quite obvious that a weakness in our cohort is the ability to analyze a text. On a whole, most seem to be unable to find the answers to questions from the text, or identify antitheses or vocal/acting direction evident from the structure of the language. It's making Rachael and Robert pretty uncomfortable that they aren't having an easy time of it, especially Robert. All year we've been told to rely on the text, let the text work for us, etc. etc. etc. But it has been obvious that most of our class does not know how. Even the fact that some are incredibly cavalier about becoming line-perfect in memorizing is an indication of it. But unsurprisingly, as Alex has forced them to work on this scene in this way, they are doing some EXCELLENT work!!
With singing, as of this week, I'm realizing and accepting that I'm especially good at golden age and art musicals. I have wanted to be good at contemporary MT and belting-- and I am, for character roles especially-- but it's not my strength. And that's very ok. I need to find a way to sing contemporary pieces and shows in a way that suits my voice but without needing to do things that compare me to anyone else. Golden age and art MT interests me more anyway. So why not emphasize that for myself-- and find a way to sing that style in any genre.
We're working through our scenes for acting class today-- stopping and starting with Alex asking questions and giving direction. Rachael and Robert have been working for about 45 minutes, but they'e only made it through about a page of the scene. What I'm observing is a feeling I've had all year, which I've been able to push aside to focus on my own work, but it is quite obvious that a weakness in our cohort is the ability to analyze a text. On a whole, most seem to be unable to find the answers to questions from the text, or identify antitheses or vocal/acting direction evident from the structure of the language. It's making Rachael and Robert pretty uncomfortable that they aren't having an easy time of it, especially Robert. All year we've been told to rely on the text, let the text work for us, etc. etc. etc. But it has been obvious that most of our class does not know how. Even the fact that some are incredibly cavalier about becoming line-perfect in memorizing is an indication of it. But unsurprisingly, as Alex has forced them to work on this scene in this way, they are doing some EXCELLENT work!!
Tuesday 17 May 2016
THE FLICK - National Theatre
I saw Annie Baker's The Flick over the weekend and haven't been able to stop thinking about it. At the risk of sounding hyperbolic, I've never seen anything like it. It was a true masterclass.
As I am wont to do, I read a number of reviews and articles about The Flick. I'm not surprised by how kind of polarizing the play was in New York over two runs. Despite it being an American play, it feels like a natural aesthetic for the National Theatre. But I also wanted to know more about the cast-- specifically the two Americans (of only four actors in the play) who originated the roles of Sam and Rose (kind of coincidental that I'm studying Variations on a Theme this term!). Matthew Maher played Sam and was just... well again, I've just never seen anything like his performance. It was clear he had a repaired cleft palate and in the play spoke with a speech impediment indicative of that procedure. But Drew and I were both unsure was to whether his impediment was at all exaggerated for the role because he spoke all at once with such clarity-- yet the whistles and lisps were predictably unpredictable the way a cleft palate impediment would be, so I just couldn't tell. Come to find out, in his actor training he has apparently worked with speech therapists and consciously decided not to improve his impediment too much. He says his scar and his speech are the reason he precisely the reason why he is having the career he has. I would also argue that he's an objectively fine actor as well, who is so in tune with his voice and his body that he uses every aspect of his voice absolutely to his advantage. I could not believe the creative emphasis he would place on seemingly simple and innocuous lines, placing the emphasis or pitch or effort to physically say a word just so. It's the kind of thing I have a hard time describing but will certainly remember the experience of hearing.
But the play wasn't just an acting masterclass-- it was a true study on living in the moment and not "playing" a pause.
There were so many pauses. "Pause" isn't even the right word for it. So much air for the play to breathe-- but not too much. It was 3 hours 15 minutes with interval and actually relatively little dialogue, and the audience spent a majority of the play watching the characters sweep popcorn and clean a movie theater. But the pauses were never forced-- never "played". They were so truthful and lived by the actors. I was never anxious for the (minimal) action to continue. And entire scene took place with an empty stage as we waited for the characters to reach the projector room on the set, where we watched their torsos (and only occasionally their faces) in silence behind sound-proof glass as they loaded the movie projector and started a film playing. It was stunning. The character Avery had a simply beautiful monologue in the form of a phone conversation and the time he took to let his therapist "reply" on the other end was so engaging and lovely. It truly felt like he was listening to something and I didn't even need to hear the other side of the conversation. His cut-off replies as he hesitated to speak or didn't want to interrupt, as one does when they're actually on a phone call, were so accurate. It didn't seem like acting at all.
I'm just so inspired going back to rehearsals for The Veil having experienced The Flick because I feel like I'm much better able to judge the same kind of living silence that Simon has been sometimes directing us to do. I hesitate to suggest my entire cohort need to see it to understand what we need to work toward. I frankly don't know that we'd all be able to live (not play) such pauses in our play without indulgence or too much action. The whole point is to avoid "playing" a silence. I'm not sure I can do it either! But I do feel so much more equipped to be sensitive to and unfearful of a silence as an actor having experienced The Flick, and prepared to make bigger risks in rehearsal.
And meanwhile marvel how lucky I am to have been able to see that play at all!
http://www.londontheatre.co.uk/londontheatre/news/ltg16/matthewmahertheflick16.htm
As I am wont to do, I read a number of reviews and articles about The Flick. I'm not surprised by how kind of polarizing the play was in New York over two runs. Despite it being an American play, it feels like a natural aesthetic for the National Theatre. But I also wanted to know more about the cast-- specifically the two Americans (of only four actors in the play) who originated the roles of Sam and Rose (kind of coincidental that I'm studying Variations on a Theme this term!). Matthew Maher played Sam and was just... well again, I've just never seen anything like his performance. It was clear he had a repaired cleft palate and in the play spoke with a speech impediment indicative of that procedure. But Drew and I were both unsure was to whether his impediment was at all exaggerated for the role because he spoke all at once with such clarity-- yet the whistles and lisps were predictably unpredictable the way a cleft palate impediment would be, so I just couldn't tell. Come to find out, in his actor training he has apparently worked with speech therapists and consciously decided not to improve his impediment too much. He says his scar and his speech are the reason he precisely the reason why he is having the career he has. I would also argue that he's an objectively fine actor as well, who is so in tune with his voice and his body that he uses every aspect of his voice absolutely to his advantage. I could not believe the creative emphasis he would place on seemingly simple and innocuous lines, placing the emphasis or pitch or effort to physically say a word just so. It's the kind of thing I have a hard time describing but will certainly remember the experience of hearing.
But the play wasn't just an acting masterclass-- it was a true study on living in the moment and not "playing" a pause.
There were so many pauses. "Pause" isn't even the right word for it. So much air for the play to breathe-- but not too much. It was 3 hours 15 minutes with interval and actually relatively little dialogue, and the audience spent a majority of the play watching the characters sweep popcorn and clean a movie theater. But the pauses were never forced-- never "played". They were so truthful and lived by the actors. I was never anxious for the (minimal) action to continue. And entire scene took place with an empty stage as we waited for the characters to reach the projector room on the set, where we watched their torsos (and only occasionally their faces) in silence behind sound-proof glass as they loaded the movie projector and started a film playing. It was stunning. The character Avery had a simply beautiful monologue in the form of a phone conversation and the time he took to let his therapist "reply" on the other end was so engaging and lovely. It truly felt like he was listening to something and I didn't even need to hear the other side of the conversation. His cut-off replies as he hesitated to speak or didn't want to interrupt, as one does when they're actually on a phone call, were so accurate. It didn't seem like acting at all.
I'm just so inspired going back to rehearsals for The Veil having experienced The Flick because I feel like I'm much better able to judge the same kind of living silence that Simon has been sometimes directing us to do. I hesitate to suggest my entire cohort need to see it to understand what we need to work toward. I frankly don't know that we'd all be able to live (not play) such pauses in our play without indulgence or too much action. The whole point is to avoid "playing" a silence. I'm not sure I can do it either! But I do feel so much more equipped to be sensitive to and unfearful of a silence as an actor having experienced The Flick, and prepared to make bigger risks in rehearsal.
And meanwhile marvel how lucky I am to have been able to see that play at all!
http://www.londontheatre.co.uk/londontheatre/news/ltg16/matthewmahertheflick16.htm
neutrality
We started work on neutral mask with Keith today on our first day of Term 3. I've done very little mask work at all-- nothing with neutral masks. This is an area where I have no experience whatsoever but I'm excited to learn.
He made a suggestion during the conversation about how important it is not only to achieve neutrality as an actor, but also not to rush past neutrality in the rehearsal process. This struck me not only because it has frankly never occurred to me to walk into a new rehearsal process in a neutral state-- without preconceived notions of what a character is "about" or who they are. It was like a revelation. It makes me so excited to get started working on The Veil this week. I've familiarized myself with the script quite well but I suppose I have the benefit of having not done too much work yet at this point, which I think will set me up very well to start this process keeping neutrality in mind as we begin. Remaining neutral erases Emily the actor from the equation and allows the character to come through naturally. I'm looking forward to it so much.
I had another realization (which kind of goes along with my thoughts regarding my feedback for Term 2) thinking back to Term 1 and my experience in the rehearsal process for As You Like It (which seems like YEARS ago, at this point!). My entire goal for Jaques became: to be "neutral," which of course stemmed largely from the fact that he is male and I am female. So in that I think my goal was a good one and I still feel good about the work I did to achieve that.
However, I realized that it also became a goal that I just became resigned to. It was not my best work, during the entire process. I was certainly self-conscious throughout the term, which prevented me from real success, or at least a few more layers of exploration and discovery. It's true that David and I did not speak the same language when it came to laying a foundation for a solid director-actor working relationship, which made me overly nervous and unsure of myself. I realize now that there was a point where "neutral" became my goal because at least it wouldn't be "wrong"-- it would just be "neutral."
I now see this as such a missed opportunity to actively seek neutrality, and also how much more credit I could have given myself at the time for my goal, particularly during Term 1. Neutrality was the right way to go. It was the right goal. But my performance was impacted because I didn't occur to me that neutrality is a powerful choice I could have made, that would have strengthened my performance and provided me the ability to layer more active choices on top of "neutral".
It has completely changed my perspective in going into rehearsals for The Veil, and it really excites me. Despite being more comfortable with my role for this term than I was Term 1, it will certainly be a challenge for me in different ways and I don't want to limit myself up front by coming in with preconceived notions that may be difficult to shift in the process. I don't want to limit myself by expecting too much of myself upfront.
I feel so free to work on this project. What a spectacular feeling.
He made a suggestion during the conversation about how important it is not only to achieve neutrality as an actor, but also not to rush past neutrality in the rehearsal process. This struck me not only because it has frankly never occurred to me to walk into a new rehearsal process in a neutral state-- without preconceived notions of what a character is "about" or who they are. It was like a revelation. It makes me so excited to get started working on The Veil this week. I've familiarized myself with the script quite well but I suppose I have the benefit of having not done too much work yet at this point, which I think will set me up very well to start this process keeping neutrality in mind as we begin. Remaining neutral erases Emily the actor from the equation and allows the character to come through naturally. I'm looking forward to it so much.
I had another realization (which kind of goes along with my thoughts regarding my feedback for Term 2) thinking back to Term 1 and my experience in the rehearsal process for As You Like It (which seems like YEARS ago, at this point!). My entire goal for Jaques became: to be "neutral," which of course stemmed largely from the fact that he is male and I am female. So in that I think my goal was a good one and I still feel good about the work I did to achieve that.
However, I realized that it also became a goal that I just became resigned to. It was not my best work, during the entire process. I was certainly self-conscious throughout the term, which prevented me from real success, or at least a few more layers of exploration and discovery. It's true that David and I did not speak the same language when it came to laying a foundation for a solid director-actor working relationship, which made me overly nervous and unsure of myself. I realize now that there was a point where "neutral" became my goal because at least it wouldn't be "wrong"-- it would just be "neutral."
I now see this as such a missed opportunity to actively seek neutrality, and also how much more credit I could have given myself at the time for my goal, particularly during Term 1. Neutrality was the right way to go. It was the right goal. But my performance was impacted because I didn't occur to me that neutrality is a powerful choice I could have made, that would have strengthened my performance and provided me the ability to layer more active choices on top of "neutral".
It has completely changed my perspective in going into rehearsals for The Veil, and it really excites me. Despite being more comfortable with my role for this term than I was Term 1, it will certainly be a challenge for me in different ways and I don't want to limit myself up front by coming in with preconceived notions that may be difficult to shift in the process. I don't want to limit myself by expecting too much of myself upfront.
I feel so free to work on this project. What a spectacular feeling.
Monday 9 May 2016
research discussion - workbook
Research proposal & presentation:
- Aim to discuss research question - title/heading
- Why does it interest me? How did I arrive at this question?
- Ways it can conduct research - research strategies
- Possible problems that may arise - how might I tackle it?
- What I hope to find
- Concisely written
- What I intend to do - perform, viva, written, etc.
- Keep in mind how this fills academic requirements/demands
- Locate what research is already out there
- how does my research fit into bigger picture?
- Opportunity to present your thinking in a persuasive way
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)