One act play on the make

Description:

This week we start working on the one act play, we had some difficulties and had to change the game and start all again.

Analysis:

A proposal for a game is difficult to find, it must be something interesting and new… The game for the one act play seem to be very interesting, but I had my doubts about it in the beginning because of the limitations it gave, like face expression or not having characters face to face. I thought that as we had the game since the beginning the script could be done in a way that it all fit so the game could work. As we start rehearsing we realized that the game didn’t work, instead of connecting with the audience it create a barrier.

Ideas don’t have limitations but to become something true there are always limits and restrictions. The game as theory sound very good, it gave the possibility of a double character and it sound visually very interesting. The truth wasn’t like that, depending on the position of the audience the two sides of the actor’s face could be seen, but still this wasn’t the major problem. As some actors couldn’t see face to face each other, although they don’t directly talk to each other as there wasn’t a connection between the characters there wasn’t a connection between the audience either. I understood that if in the scene one character shows uninterested on what the other character says and ignore it, so will the audience.

The new game is simpler and this made the play lighter, we could relate each other more directly and this helps to keep a connection with the audience. The next thing we had to change was the script, when I wrote up my scene I stick up with the short lines to create dynamism, but while acting and reading the whole script I found the short lines and a story is not enough in a script. A script needs to have actions, and the big problem is that in the whole script the same actions were repeated. The characters repeated the same lines and didn’t add anything more into the scene. This repeating and repeating made the play boring. At the beginning I thought we had to complicate more the story to have something to tell but while actually improvising with the outline clear I understood that the script doesn’t only show the story, but the personality of each character. Then for the outline and plot of a play can be really simply and still each line of the script adds something as it shows something about the characters, builds up their personality.

Decisions on the game for a play gives the opportunity to explore different possibilities with space, time, characters, the forth wall, etc. but this choices also give limitations.

Doing the ritual scene was great fun. I love how theatrical this is. I think this scene is a great opportunity where I can apply the “segmentation exercises” I learned in the Grotowsky workshops. I think it also gives a great opportunity for the use of the space as different movements like “choreographies” can be made.

Connections:

The limitations the games remind me to the costs of creativity in shadow queendom. Because of the use of puppets and masks we had to face different limitations too, but the limitations we had in shadow queendom as the lack of face expression could be compensated with body expression in case of wearing a mask or with the movements of the body of the puppets and the intentions in the voice.

Reflection:

Short lines make the script work, but what about the long monologues, or the Greek theatre scripts, what makes them work? I think that for Greek theatre the long lines worked because of the audience, the audience as the words where very important, but what about the monologues? May it be because it’s just in a certain moment? And anyways what makes a script with long lines work? Or because of the audience at these times they will not work, as in “Mades Medus”?