I have a masters... and theatre still makes me feel stupid sometimes.
Thursday was a busy day of theatre for me. I saw One Yellow Rabbit’s Dream Machine at 12:30 with a bunch of high school and college students. In the evening, I saw the opening night performance of Third Wall’s Dr. Faustus.
I always feel a little odd expressing my opinions about theatre on my blog. I have a feeling a lot more people read this little journal than I would normally expect. Every once and a while a comment from someone I haven’t spoken to in a while will be left, or I’ll meet someone on the street and find out they’ve been avid readers. I greatly respect and admire most of the people who read this and would never want to accidentally hurt or insult anyone. I guess that’s why some of us bloggers have felt the need to make that clear before someone reads our latest post.
Anywho… Dream Machine.
I didn’t get it.
Ok, yes, this might sound weird coming from a woman who recently directed a Tristan Tzara play… but I just didn’t get it.
I don’t mind plays that aren’t linear. Let’s face it, non-linear is the new linear. I accept and enjoy that, but this play was so non-linear that it didn’t make much sense to me at all.
And I agree that plays don’t have to “make sense” to be good plays, but then I at least have to be fully captivated by something in the performance to compensate for the lack of continuity/plot/logic. The performers in this play were great, no doubt. So were the musicians. But they didn’t grab me like I had hoped. I found the women more captivating than the men, but it still wasn’t enough to keep my full interest for an hour and a half. I was trying to explain to someone what bothered me about the performance, but didn’t do a good job without gesticulating like crazy… but I’ll still try to explain it here in writing.
The staging of a play can also be called a “physical score” (a term I was taught by a professor and friend of mine). Like a musical score, written down on a page, a physical score can be repeated exactly, broken down, rhythmically adjusted and examined. Simply put, an example of a physical score can be “person walks from point A to point B, taking four steps starting with the right foot.” What makes a physical score performed by one person different from another person’s is the “underscore”. (Or “subtext” if you want to get all Stanislavskian.) So the underscore for one person could be “it’s as if I’m stepping towards the man of my dreams” and for another person it could be “it’s as if I am a robot testing out my new legs.”… different underscore, same score. The problem I had with Dream Machine was, though the physical score was beautiful to watch, I didn’t always get the feeling that the underscore was clear for each performer. Not that, as a spectator, I’m supposed to be able to read the underscore. However, if the underscore is clear to each performer and they perform it with belief and sincerity, they create a certain presence for themselves on stage that makes it difficult for an audience member to not be captivated by it.
And now, on to Doctor Faustus.
I’m biased. Stewart is in the production and, as usual, he’s great fun to watch.
Did I like the show? Yes.
Do I think it’s a great show? Not quite yet.
Do I think it has the potential to be a great show? Definitely.
The set, costumes and lighting are fantastic. The directorial concept is a very interesting one and does succeed in making a classic text more accessible to today’s audience. However, I wish it had gone further in that vein and therefore I found it a little inconsistent with its choices. I enjoyed the updating so much that I wanted more of it. The audience is allowed to laugh, but I felt we were not quite given the “permission” to do so until a little late in the play. (I don’t want to give too much away, so you’ll have to see the show and form your own opinion!)
I also sometimes felt that the actors weren’t always 100% sure of what they were saying, so therefore it made it difficult for the audience to fully understand… but I think that’s something that might be ironed out with future performances.
All in all, it was an enjoyable evening and definitely recommendable.
Oh, and to answer recent comments on my last post… no I will not be doing my PHD… even though Bamfaphd does have a nice ring to it! The MFA is a terminal degree, (sounds serious doesn’t it?) and therefore I can’t go directly to the doctorate level unless I get equivalent M.A. courses. I don’t think that’ll happen anytime soon… if ever! I’m too tired to go back to school.
I always feel a little odd expressing my opinions about theatre on my blog. I have a feeling a lot more people read this little journal than I would normally expect. Every once and a while a comment from someone I haven’t spoken to in a while will be left, or I’ll meet someone on the street and find out they’ve been avid readers. I greatly respect and admire most of the people who read this and would never want to accidentally hurt or insult anyone. I guess that’s why some of us bloggers have felt the need to make that clear before someone reads our latest post.
Anywho… Dream Machine.
I didn’t get it.
Ok, yes, this might sound weird coming from a woman who recently directed a Tristan Tzara play… but I just didn’t get it.
I don’t mind plays that aren’t linear. Let’s face it, non-linear is the new linear. I accept and enjoy that, but this play was so non-linear that it didn’t make much sense to me at all.
And I agree that plays don’t have to “make sense” to be good plays, but then I at least have to be fully captivated by something in the performance to compensate for the lack of continuity/plot/logic. The performers in this play were great, no doubt. So were the musicians. But they didn’t grab me like I had hoped. I found the women more captivating than the men, but it still wasn’t enough to keep my full interest for an hour and a half. I was trying to explain to someone what bothered me about the performance, but didn’t do a good job without gesticulating like crazy… but I’ll still try to explain it here in writing.
The staging of a play can also be called a “physical score” (a term I was taught by a professor and friend of mine). Like a musical score, written down on a page, a physical score can be repeated exactly, broken down, rhythmically adjusted and examined. Simply put, an example of a physical score can be “person walks from point A to point B, taking four steps starting with the right foot.” What makes a physical score performed by one person different from another person’s is the “underscore”. (Or “subtext” if you want to get all Stanislavskian.) So the underscore for one person could be “it’s as if I’m stepping towards the man of my dreams” and for another person it could be “it’s as if I am a robot testing out my new legs.”… different underscore, same score. The problem I had with Dream Machine was, though the physical score was beautiful to watch, I didn’t always get the feeling that the underscore was clear for each performer. Not that, as a spectator, I’m supposed to be able to read the underscore. However, if the underscore is clear to each performer and they perform it with belief and sincerity, they create a certain presence for themselves on stage that makes it difficult for an audience member to not be captivated by it.
And now, on to Doctor Faustus.
I’m biased. Stewart is in the production and, as usual, he’s great fun to watch.
Did I like the show? Yes.
Do I think it’s a great show? Not quite yet.
Do I think it has the potential to be a great show? Definitely.
The set, costumes and lighting are fantastic. The directorial concept is a very interesting one and does succeed in making a classic text more accessible to today’s audience. However, I wish it had gone further in that vein and therefore I found it a little inconsistent with its choices. I enjoyed the updating so much that I wanted more of it. The audience is allowed to laugh, but I felt we were not quite given the “permission” to do so until a little late in the play. (I don’t want to give too much away, so you’ll have to see the show and form your own opinion!)
I also sometimes felt that the actors weren’t always 100% sure of what they were saying, so therefore it made it difficult for the audience to fully understand… but I think that’s something that might be ironed out with future performances.
All in all, it was an enjoyable evening and definitely recommendable.
Oh, and to answer recent comments on my last post… no I will not be doing my PHD… even though Bamfaphd does have a nice ring to it! The MFA is a terminal degree, (sounds serious doesn’t it?) and therefore I can’t go directly to the doctorate level unless I get equivalent M.A. courses. I don’t think that’ll happen anytime soon… if ever! I’m too tired to go back to school.
Labels: Theatre Work
posted by Natalie Joy @ 10/27/2006 09:02:00 PM
0 comments
