Monday 13 June 2016

animal assessment reflections

Well. That's done.

Lou had initially not wanted me to take this second half of the assessment, having missed class leading up to today. Which is fair enough, except that we aren't marked on process. Being essentially an improv exercise, it seems to me (assuming I've done work on my own to embody an orangutan as a human) practice with peers is potentially helpful (of course) but won't necessarily improve my ultimate assessed performance. I was glad Alex agreed with me on that. And I also feel strongly that my animal work assessment is not my whole priority of this programme, compared to other assessments. I always want to do well, and I don't take for granted any of the assessment assignments. They are chosen specifically for our benefit, and so it's important to me. But since this term has been about perspective, I know that not every single assessment can possibly be THE MOST important. My research and acting class and voice are subjects that interest me more and which I am more likely to be areas of employment in the future, etc. etc. etc.

All that said-- I think it went pretty well. I was with Zak and Madison in a movie theatre. It was fine. I was orangutany, I interacted with the others as well as I could. It was fine.

That said-- this module remains problematic. While our scenario was fine, it doesn't provide opportunity to interact naturally, since the whole point of the location is to quietly watch a movie in a dark room. Propriety dictates the quietness, and while that could be an interesting conflict, it would require some acutely developed improv skills (or natural talent) between all scene partners and perhaps more than 3-5 minutes of scene development. The other problem is that we all came in separately and the given instructions don't let us necessarily attend the movie, in this case, as friends with the other people/animals in the scene. Makes it hard to interact with people/animals that our animals wouldn't naturally interact with. It's not a naturally active setting for a scene.

Meanwhile, Rachael and Jared were put in a bar on a blind date. The setting forces (or at least encourages) interaction between two animals/people who would otherwise avoid each other, in an active location. I thought they both did very well. But it's a more natural, maybe easy, setting to succeed.

But it goes back to the idea that this module is not a particularly strong one to be assessed. I think animal work is interesting and important enough to be studied, but the components of the assessment are imbalanced and not well applied. The animals-as-humans seems to be better applied to actual characters in actual scenes. I know for myself I would be better able to embody an orangutan in a character without juggling the improv aspect, and it would be an incredibly useful study in approaching characters and process. As it stands, it's about transformation... but problematically so. Additionally, in the same way the animal assignments are imbalanced by the physical work required for each actor, the scenarios then don't provide everyone a balanced opportunity to interact.

That said-- it's fine. And it's over. On to singing, voice, acting scenes and The Veil.

No comments:

Post a Comment