In Tucson there is the theatre that most of us make, and then there is the theatre that Matt Walley makes. His work is the only real distinction in terms of style and form and content. For the rest of us, those who are at theatres such as Beowulf Alley, Rogue, Winding Road, Live Theatre, and others, the degrees of separation that distinguish our works are very small, almost non-existent really. Yes, some work can be categorized as more political or contains more sexual allusions, etc, but the form of production and the acting and the presentation is common and all of it falls within a small range of style and ability. Our audiences are expecting and view our work with a knowing eye and ear. But not Matt Walley’s. His is unique. And requires a different consideration. I recently spent a couple of hours in candid conversation with Walley, picking his brain about his work, his ideas and of course his hopes for the future, for theatre, for Tucson. Time well spent. Now if I had my way, Matt Walley would be studying the work of Lee J. Cobb and then using his own talent to create the same kind of characters, with all that soul, depth and largeness looming over the stage with dominance and power, wit and charisma, emotion and physical presence. But alas, Walley (as friends call him) has taken another path, and in this case, my personal “ loss” is a boom for other aspects of theatre. One little note, or fact, to make known right now is that Walley is the originator and founder of our modern “Late Night” series of theatre in Tucson. He “invented” it and popularized it. That is only one feather in his local cap as a theatre artist, but it speaks to his ability and ideas and intentions. But before I go too far into his directing and producing, I need to expand and explain my Lee J. Cobb reference - for acting like that is a rare, rare beast. As an actor Walley is supremely talented, but his depth and capabilities have only been partly tapped and showcased. That said, by Walley’s own admission and explanation, as an actor he has remade and reinvented himself a couple of times over. He has become physically accomplished and diverse, going from an actor who could not move well to an actor who is lyrical and rhythmic and highly expressive with his body. That makeover leaves him with a range of grace and power in his acting body that is formidable. His great wealth and talent and fairly untapped abilities however, lie in his emotional and mental capacities as an actor. There is largeness. And thus, my Lee J. Cobb comparison. All this I mention because I want to make the point that Walley, being a director and teacher, is keenly aware of what kind of transformation is possible when one embarks on a path of study and work. A path of study and work - this notion is one of the things (along with many other things) which makes Walley a blood brother to me (We still have to have the official ceremony). And now I’m going to tell you a little-known fact, and even less spoken of, almost never revealed, realized by few even for whom it is true. When a person embarks on a “path” of disciplined study and approach, one that is by a noble intent and nature transformative, (for example it may be a path of Kung Fu, or actor training in the manner and way of Stanislavsky) and if a person does this earnestly over time with empathy and compassion, that person becomes “Wild.” It’s an odd phenomenon to grasp, and I won’t explain further at the moment except to say Walley… might… be …wild. Jump, Jump, Jump ahead, change of subject again - when we as spectators watch a show developed and directed by Walley, we have to think and consider and even ask ourselves what is this? But we don’t do it out of total confusion. We do it out of the experience generated by the unexpected and different format and style which Walley presents to us. At the heart of that style is an actor, or a group of actors who function as poets/artists (per Walley’s lingo). This actor or group of actors have formed a point of view about life and/or subjects, or moments in life, and have created an expression of it by means of physical bodily activity. It makes it’s own logic and means, suitable as required, and becomes what Eugenio Barba might term “Biological..” Let’s say its alive as a being unto itself. But don’t assume alien or unintelligible. Walley’s work maintains a certain simplicity and elegance, born perhaps on his clever and patient sensibilities. His motto could be “its right there if you want to see it.” One would only have to look. But in Walley’s world, in his training, his approach, looking means really looking and becoming able to see anew. If you’re a spectator or an actor under Walley’s auspices, he will take you places in ways no one else can or will. There may indeed be a Eugenia Woods or some young person lurking out there in our theatre sphere ready to launch something equally different and challenging on us, but for now Walley stands alone on a cutting edge. End Part One.
Monday, September 30, 2013
BoomTown Profiles Series - Matt Walley, Part One
Part One - "Along a Path."
In Tucson there is the theatre that most of us make, and then there is the theatre that Matt Walley makes. His work is the only real distinction in terms of style and form and content. For the rest of us, those who are at theatres such as Beowulf Alley, Rogue, Winding Road, Live Theatre, and others, the degrees of separation that distinguish our works are very small, almost non-existent really. Yes, some work can be categorized as more political or contains more sexual allusions, etc, but the form of production and the acting and the presentation is common and all of it falls within a small range of style and ability. Our audiences are expecting and view our work with a knowing eye and ear. But not Matt Walley’s. His is unique. And requires a different consideration. I recently spent a couple of hours in candid conversation with Walley, picking his brain about his work, his ideas and of course his hopes for the future, for theatre, for Tucson. Time well spent. Now if I had my way, Matt Walley would be studying the work of Lee J. Cobb and then using his own talent to create the same kind of characters, with all that soul, depth and largeness looming over the stage with dominance and power, wit and charisma, emotion and physical presence. But alas, Walley (as friends call him) has taken another path, and in this case, my personal “ loss” is a boom for other aspects of theatre. One little note, or fact, to make known right now is that Walley is the originator and founder of our modern “Late Night” series of theatre in Tucson. He “invented” it and popularized it. That is only one feather in his local cap as a theatre artist, but it speaks to his ability and ideas and intentions. But before I go too far into his directing and producing, I need to expand and explain my Lee J. Cobb reference - for acting like that is a rare, rare beast. As an actor Walley is supremely talented, but his depth and capabilities have only been partly tapped and showcased. That said, by Walley’s own admission and explanation, as an actor he has remade and reinvented himself a couple of times over. He has become physically accomplished and diverse, going from an actor who could not move well to an actor who is lyrical and rhythmic and highly expressive with his body. That makeover leaves him with a range of grace and power in his acting body that is formidable. His great wealth and talent and fairly untapped abilities however, lie in his emotional and mental capacities as an actor. There is largeness. And thus, my Lee J. Cobb comparison. All this I mention because I want to make the point that Walley, being a director and teacher, is keenly aware of what kind of transformation is possible when one embarks on a path of study and work. A path of study and work - this notion is one of the things (along with many other things) which makes Walley a blood brother to me (We still have to have the official ceremony). And now I’m going to tell you a little-known fact, and even less spoken of, almost never revealed, realized by few even for whom it is true. When a person embarks on a “path” of disciplined study and approach, one that is by a noble intent and nature transformative, (for example it may be a path of Kung Fu, or actor training in the manner and way of Stanislavsky) and if a person does this earnestly over time with empathy and compassion, that person becomes “Wild.” It’s an odd phenomenon to grasp, and I won’t explain further at the moment except to say Walley… might… be …wild. Jump, Jump, Jump ahead, change of subject again - when we as spectators watch a show developed and directed by Walley, we have to think and consider and even ask ourselves what is this? But we don’t do it out of total confusion. We do it out of the experience generated by the unexpected and different format and style which Walley presents to us. At the heart of that style is an actor, or a group of actors who function as poets/artists (per Walley’s lingo). This actor or group of actors have formed a point of view about life and/or subjects, or moments in life, and have created an expression of it by means of physical bodily activity. It makes it’s own logic and means, suitable as required, and becomes what Eugenio Barba might term “Biological..” Let’s say its alive as a being unto itself. But don’t assume alien or unintelligible. Walley’s work maintains a certain simplicity and elegance, born perhaps on his clever and patient sensibilities. His motto could be “its right there if you want to see it.” One would only have to look. But in Walley’s world, in his training, his approach, looking means really looking and becoming able to see anew. If you’re a spectator or an actor under Walley’s auspices, he will take you places in ways no one else can or will. There may indeed be a Eugenia Woods or some young person lurking out there in our theatre sphere ready to launch something equally different and challenging on us, but for now Walley stands alone on a cutting edge. End Part One.
In Tucson there is the theatre that most of us make, and then there is the theatre that Matt Walley makes. His work is the only real distinction in terms of style and form and content. For the rest of us, those who are at theatres such as Beowulf Alley, Rogue, Winding Road, Live Theatre, and others, the degrees of separation that distinguish our works are very small, almost non-existent really. Yes, some work can be categorized as more political or contains more sexual allusions, etc, but the form of production and the acting and the presentation is common and all of it falls within a small range of style and ability. Our audiences are expecting and view our work with a knowing eye and ear. But not Matt Walley’s. His is unique. And requires a different consideration. I recently spent a couple of hours in candid conversation with Walley, picking his brain about his work, his ideas and of course his hopes for the future, for theatre, for Tucson. Time well spent. Now if I had my way, Matt Walley would be studying the work of Lee J. Cobb and then using his own talent to create the same kind of characters, with all that soul, depth and largeness looming over the stage with dominance and power, wit and charisma, emotion and physical presence. But alas, Walley (as friends call him) has taken another path, and in this case, my personal “ loss” is a boom for other aspects of theatre. One little note, or fact, to make known right now is that Walley is the originator and founder of our modern “Late Night” series of theatre in Tucson. He “invented” it and popularized it. That is only one feather in his local cap as a theatre artist, but it speaks to his ability and ideas and intentions. But before I go too far into his directing and producing, I need to expand and explain my Lee J. Cobb reference - for acting like that is a rare, rare beast. As an actor Walley is supremely talented, but his depth and capabilities have only been partly tapped and showcased. That said, by Walley’s own admission and explanation, as an actor he has remade and reinvented himself a couple of times over. He has become physically accomplished and diverse, going from an actor who could not move well to an actor who is lyrical and rhythmic and highly expressive with his body. That makeover leaves him with a range of grace and power in his acting body that is formidable. His great wealth and talent and fairly untapped abilities however, lie in his emotional and mental capacities as an actor. There is largeness. And thus, my Lee J. Cobb comparison. All this I mention because I want to make the point that Walley, being a director and teacher, is keenly aware of what kind of transformation is possible when one embarks on a path of study and work. A path of study and work - this notion is one of the things (along with many other things) which makes Walley a blood brother to me (We still have to have the official ceremony). And now I’m going to tell you a little-known fact, and even less spoken of, almost never revealed, realized by few even for whom it is true. When a person embarks on a “path” of disciplined study and approach, one that is by a noble intent and nature transformative, (for example it may be a path of Kung Fu, or actor training in the manner and way of Stanislavsky) and if a person does this earnestly over time with empathy and compassion, that person becomes “Wild.” It’s an odd phenomenon to grasp, and I won’t explain further at the moment except to say Walley… might… be …wild. Jump, Jump, Jump ahead, change of subject again - when we as spectators watch a show developed and directed by Walley, we have to think and consider and even ask ourselves what is this? But we don’t do it out of total confusion. We do it out of the experience generated by the unexpected and different format and style which Walley presents to us. At the heart of that style is an actor, or a group of actors who function as poets/artists (per Walley’s lingo). This actor or group of actors have formed a point of view about life and/or subjects, or moments in life, and have created an expression of it by means of physical bodily activity. It makes it’s own logic and means, suitable as required, and becomes what Eugenio Barba might term “Biological..” Let’s say its alive as a being unto itself. But don’t assume alien or unintelligible. Walley’s work maintains a certain simplicity and elegance, born perhaps on his clever and patient sensibilities. His motto could be “its right there if you want to see it.” One would only have to look. But in Walley’s world, in his training, his approach, looking means really looking and becoming able to see anew. If you’re a spectator or an actor under Walley’s auspices, he will take you places in ways no one else can or will. There may indeed be a Eugenia Woods or some young person lurking out there in our theatre sphere ready to launch something equally different and challenging on us, but for now Walley stands alone on a cutting edge. End Part One.
Friday, September 27, 2013
Measure For Measure
Working now on Measure For Measure. Heavens to Betsy this play is just weird. What do any of us find interesting about it? It's stock full of convention, puns, confusing time line, incomplete action, etc.
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Affective Memory - Short Note
There is no doubt in my mind that the best of actors consciously uses their emotional memories actively in their work. Now, some may not admit to it and some may do it accidentally, but it happens because...good acting with depth and meaning doesn't happen without it. I should repeat that. Without the actor's affective memory in active participation with the fiction of the play, good acting doesn't happen. And so it only follows in my book that unless actor training and preparation includes conscious and purposeful use of emotional memory, then you might as well play tiddly-winks or do gymnastics. Shakespeare knew this, Stanislavsky described it for us, and taught us how to consciously make use of it, Vakhtangov reinforced it and Strasberg freed it for all of us.
Monday, September 16, 2013
The Beginnings of Playscript Analysis. Quickly.
When I am looking at a playscript, the obvious task is how to turn it into a stage performance. So like many people I begin to analyse it in a particular way. I take note of my first general impression(and the actors general impressions)if this is a very first reading and introduction to the play. But at this point I do not go beyond the simple kind of "I liked it" or "It confuses me" or "That character stands out" statements. Very general, but no other discussion. The next go through the play is only to start gathering facts that are obvious in the script, all the where, when, who, etc. And only facts actually noted or evident. No making things up or suggesting that "it could be..." The gathering of facts can also mean/include such things as how often "time" is referred to in a particular script. I'm thinking of The Cherry Orchard when I mention that for example. In other words, some notable trait about the overall script can also be mentioned at this time. The next go through, is meant to start articulating what the sequence of actions is. And this is done like a story-telling process. "This guy is sleeping and this girl comes running in and wakes him up. He asks her what time it is and she starts going about trying to straighten up cushions, ...etc." Told like a story. Like a series of little events. Once you make that kind of "description," you have taken the first real step toward turning the words into action and stage behavior. Now you can have actors work immediately with the action itself, using themselves in their entirety. That is the beginning.
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Yourself in the Circumstances, Doing, Senses.
Before the new days of "Physical Theatre" and "Gesture," before these words crept into our theatrical vocabulary and completely took over, actors used to speak of "Doing" on stage. You would hear questions from your teacher or director like "are you really doing that action or are you just pretending to do it?" "Did you actually see, or were you just indicating that you saw something?" The distinction was and is crucial. And should be even for those who feel they want to be engaged in "Physical Theatre." And the reason is this - a complete and full Physical Gesture must have real biological implications on both the actor and the spectator. When we speak about "Doing" on stage, what we are actually asking and wanting from the actor to is to engage his/or her senses actively in the fiction of the play. When the senses engage, biological implications begin to occur. This is part the process of using your own experiences, your own self, literally among the circumstances of the play.
Friday, September 13, 2013
Creating from Oneself
I am working on a post about how and why an actor needs to condition and discipline his or her mind for creative work. Some of it will pertain to a "first lesson" that I will facilitate in a workshop. The lesson is entitled "Ethics and Discipline of an Actor's Mind." But in the meantime, here is the beginning of a companion piece, a companion "lesson." The thought or the question is what constitutes talent or what is the first thing or the main thing that you would look for that may eventually give rise to great acting? For me the answer is the ability to create from oneself, from one's own experiences and feelings and thoughts. That means, to take a real life experiences, bring them to the moment as actual physical sensations and thoughts (not as intellectualized memory and metaphor) and fictionalize them into behavior that is conducive to the purpose for which you are acting. That process is distinctly different from a process of copying the behavior of others or simply indicating or implying through gesture as a means of communication with spectators.
Thursday, September 12, 2013
Actors Listen
It was brought to my attention many years ago that listening on stage is very elusive and that actual, real listening where you hear and think and realize is extremely rare. And yet in many cases, it makes all the difference in the world in terms of quality of the scene and the acting. Of course actors know what's coming in terms of the lines and so they are anticipating what will be said. Additionally, they are busy going about their own behaviors, preoccupied with their "acting" so to speak. So typically they are not really hearing what is being said, or what is being communicated. The only cure I've found is a very conscious effort to become interested in what is being said and done, in detail. The actor who can listen with his/her mind and then with the entire being and body, that is an actor.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Notes From a Discussion - Stanislavsky/Strasberg, ETC.
The practical problem with the with the kind of work you are referring to is that it simply produces just that - an image. It makes a moment, an instance of something. But it doesn't give the actor a sense or a means of continuing on, of creating moment by moment by moment, and then letting the cumulative effect take its toll. Having watched and participated in many of these exercises (which are often willy-nilly or "another tool in your belt" kind of thing) I can tell you that the structure and format of the work is such that it ends at the creation of the "image" or "the moment." Now in that moment, within that image, the actor often has a very general "feeling" of being alive, having some sensations, some thoughts, some impulses, etc. But they are not understood or accepted to be something which actually leads you to the next bit of behavior. Rather they are accepted and understood to be static, or they are simply understood as a "see, you can produce feeling by this means of fantasy or physicality." The problem arises when the actor has to continue, has to do the next thing, the next bit of behavior, the next action. He/She does not know how to recognize and follow real deal impulse and so the next thing they do is something they think they should do and in that old way they turn to copying other actors, copying cliches, etc. As you said, back to square one that Stanislavsky tried to deal with. So these moments, these images, that are created in these formats may indeed be a kind of 'art" but they are not the living art of the stage that Stanislavsky was advocating. Now if you have someone like Michael Chekhov who was trained to and could work impulsively in the moment in a continuous manner and He or She was seeking to find a way to make a particular moment more "poetic" lets say, then such an exercise could possibly come in handy. But to think or assume that such exercises actually teach an actor what and how to do on stage over a continued period of time is wrong, because they don't. Strasberg's work on the other hand as an example, you know of course much better than I do, teaches actors how to recognize the impulses and how to continue with them - i.e. to act! The structure and format of a Sensory Exercise or an Improvisation doesn't end with the arousal of general feelings of experience. It uses smaller thought and desire and sensation or physical actions as an impulse to move along to the next thing and the next thing and the next thing, keeping the mind and body engaged at all times over a particular longer period of time as an actor must do.
Monday, September 9, 2013
Boomtown Profiles
Our city is a boomtown! Exploding in Arts and Commerce like never before. The young and the innovative and the ambitious have arrived in Tucson all at once. Given that I always seem to spend a portion of my day walking through our Downtown area and having the chance to see and meet many of the people on the scene, I think its time to finally start writing about some of these good people that are making great things happen. So, I'm gonna start that theatre artist profile section that I have always intended. And since I personally have a wide variety as interests (as many people do) I'm sure I will throw in a few business and civic minded people as well. Expansion and activity is the norm around here - time to get with it!
Friday, September 6, 2013
Ten Lessons on Top
Here are the titles of ten "Lessons" to be presented weekly as part of a scene-study class I will lead beginning this month.
Lesson One - Ethics and Discipline of an Actor's Mind.
Lesson Two - Active Analysis of a Playscript.
Lesson Three - Acting is the Essential Breath and Heartbeat of Theatre.
Lesson Four - Personal Experience Gives Rise to Spontaneity and Specific Behaviour.
Lesson Five - The Mind Asks, and the Body Responds.
Lesson Six - Creating a Logical Sequence of Actions.
Lesson Seven - Scenic Presence and Creative Expression.
Lesson Eight - If You Don't Feel It, Then It's Fake.
Lesson Nine - Joy and Creative Enthusiasm.
Lesson Ten - Mastering a Technique. Freeing Oneself From a Technique That One Has Mastered.
Lesson One - Ethics and Discipline of an Actor's Mind.
Lesson Two - Active Analysis of a Playscript.
Lesson Three - Acting is the Essential Breath and Heartbeat of Theatre.
Lesson Four - Personal Experience Gives Rise to Spontaneity and Specific Behaviour.
Lesson Five - The Mind Asks, and the Body Responds.
Lesson Six - Creating a Logical Sequence of Actions.
Lesson Seven - Scenic Presence and Creative Expression.
Lesson Eight - If You Don't Feel It, Then It's Fake.
Lesson Nine - Joy and Creative Enthusiasm.
Lesson Ten - Mastering a Technique. Freeing Oneself From a Technique That One Has Mastered.
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)