Beginning to look for the Main Event of the character

The burning question now is what is the "main event" of the play for Jess. To begin to determine this, I have to put together the sequence of events that actually make up the play that the spectators will see. Off hand there are a couple of events that are candidates for the main event, the most important thing that happens, the change that occurs, the character dealing with the totality of his circumstances in some profound and meaningful way. In the meantime, I took some time to read some reviews both of the London and the New York production. Now, Jez Butterworth radically altered the character of Jess, rewriting for the New York production. Its almost a different man. The change of the script is drastic. More to that later in another post perhaps. However, whether the London or the New York script, both of which I have read and studied, I have to wonder about the reviews and what they say. Either the perception of the reviewers was unusual or the productions themselves emphasized some things that were not characteristic of the actual script. Maybe a combination of the two, I don't know. But either way the reviews almost seem like they are talking about a different set of circumstances, almost a different play. And so, I keep on working on the facts and the events and their logic.

initiating event

My posts are slightly behind the actual rehearsal schedule...but that is o.k. The intent of my analysis is to eventually pinpoint what my character is doing, thinking, feeling, wanting, moment by moment throughout the play. In doing this, I tend to avoid some common phrases and terminology. Not that they are bad. I just don't use them. For example "character arc." And although this is not a purely cold intellectual effort I am trying to avoid comparisons and assumptions at this point, things such as "oh, this character is like my uncle john" or "this character reminds me of those people who always...." And I am especially avoiding metaphors or summations at this point. I am repeating this, having said it in earlier posts, but its importance bears that. So onward. To the narrative of events now I can add other pieces of information contained in the script. Other characters describe my character in past events as "having been full of beans, busy organizing." Or they describe the effects of something my character has done, such as creating this incredible garden. The events and descriptions listed therefore in the script give rise to certain characteristics of personality perhaps - an energetic man, well organized, meticulous, detailed and caring. He is mentioned and seen as a man who can recite long passages of the old testament by heart. He remembers names and details of places, things, people, etc. So we can imagine he pays great attention and/or his mind is sharp and clear. We can imagine that he is a patient man, as many of the tasks and events to which he was involved would require such a quality. We know according to the script that the character of Warren Lee teased and tormented Jess in mean and cruel ways for several months before Jess finally broke, his patience exasperated, and he slapped Warren Lee. This slap, the initiating event to this series of events that eventually becomes this play, now begins to have a context. Slapping this boy sends Jess' life in a completely different and unexpected direction. But I can begin to imagine and understand how "out of character" this action is. I can put it in context with everything else and I can wonder how it felt for him in that very moment. Perhaps the action surprised even himself. Did he regret it immediately afterward? No doubt he now has many thoughts and feelings associated with this event, complex and deep. But here now I have my basis, a general understanding of the initiating event of the play.

Here's a listing of the events referenced in the script which take place prior to the beginning of the events of the play itself. You won't know the events if you are not familiar with the script,but the thing to take away from it is that I am not putting any interpretation on them yet. Also this list is specific to the character of Jess, meaning that there are other events referenced in the script which make up the narrative of the entire play which I am leaving off for now. 1. Jess helps pick the annual carnival queen and rides of a parade float with the Mayor and the queen, Jane Livingstone. 2. Dougal has a work accident (which leads eventually to a monetary settlement in his favor). 3. Jess is working to save the quince tree when Floyd's boy comes looking for his dad. Jess looks after the boy in the cold and dark. 4.Joins in working with Dougal and is given the homework of making an Iconostasis, which he does. 4. A Night Heron bird is reported spotted in the region. 5. Jess slaps Warren on the face. Incident is reported in the papers. 6. Jess is fired from his job. 7. Dougal is leafleting on Jess' behalf. 8. Floyd's boy incident becomes known rumor. 9. Jess is beaten up on the Marsh Road at night. 10. Receives his Dole money. 11. Begins making tapes for Dougal. That is a chronological order, give or take a couple of them as the information available in the script which references them is brief. But that is basically it. Just the facts ma'am. Now taking those and the other events referenced in the script I can tell the narrative to myself (and others)fully in its logical sequence. Each of these events will be used imaginatively later on but the question to seek and answer now is which one of these events is key to setting in motion the events of the play itself? My current answer is the slap with Warren. That sets off a chain reaction of things which make for a sudden and profound change in Jess' situation, his life. It also matches up with the final event which the audience sees from him when he kisses the other character on the cheek. Slap to the cheek. Kiss to the cheek. Key events.

The Night Heron part two

Having a clear grasp of the series of events that lead up to and continue through the play, allows me to begin to think “imaginatively” or perhaps better said “creatively” about the play and the character. I can review this story, this series of events, over and over in my mind, eventually filling in further details as I do, all based upon things said or done in the script itself. I know the time, the place, and the conditions of each series of events that are referenced. I feel like the logic of the progression of events is sound. So then I start to ask myself the question “what would it be like to be in that situation?” Now here’s the catch. I am an actor, and therefore my “answers” to that question have to manifest themselves in behavior, not in description. So while yes I can explain to myself what each situation may be like, and while its not unhelpful for me to do so as an actor, it doesn’t really set the conditions for my body to learn what it needs to learn in order to “get it” and do what it needs to do on stage in the moment of performance. As an actor, I have to have thought and speech and movement and feeling and intention all rooted in these events, these experiences. And having been educated, trained, and artistically tempered in a particular way, I don’t want my final rendition to be merely natural like behavior that is truthfully based in those experiences, but rather beyond that I want it to be a clear and precise poetic expression of the ideas of the play as they exist living and breathing in this character’s actions. So how do I begin to answer the question “what would it be like to be in that situation?” I search and explore the situations biologically - with my senses, and I allow a certain amount of free association to arise as I do. I let my body start to find impulses and thoughts and movements and sensations based on being in those situations. I don’t (or try not to) judge the behavior but rather I try to allow my instincts to work unhinged. Mind you, this is a very disciplined approach. This is not an anything goes way. The parameters are strict and tight. Think mustard seed. But with this work that little bit of faith in the situation or rather my body’s responses to the situations is established. Actor. Behavior. Action. The work continues.

Working on The Night Heron

Working on the role of Jess Wattmore in the play The Night Heron, by Jez Butterworth, at the Rogue Theatre. Beginning work - tracing the line of action, trying to articulate and understand the sequence of events that are referenced in the script. Going one by one to get the time and place and basic result of each one. (Side question - why on God's green earth do modern playwrights, those of the 90's and 2K's, like to leave things so "mysterious," so two-sided?). I need to be able to tell the entire story alluded to in the script to myself in order to begin to make sense of the action that will actually occur on stage. This is a process of coolly examining the facts and circumstances as presented by the script. I am not imagining or inventing or adding to what the playwright has offered. Take what is offered and see if the logic follows itself. If it doesn't make sense on the first try, reread and rethink. Don't make things up in an attempt to understand events individually and don't try to shape them to fit personal opinion or wish-fantasy. Try to get the whole. If the script is well written, the logic of events works out, including disruptions. So for example, based on what the script of The Night Heron says I can begin to tell myself a basic story about Jess Wattmore, in context with the basic story of the entire play. "Jess is working as a gardener at Cambridge. He is working in the quince tree when Floyd Fowler's boy comes around, etc. Jess is with the Scouts when he slaps one of them. The story of it comes out in the newspaper. Jess gets dismissed from his job. Jess starts helping, working with Dougall (who had earlier been employed with Cambridge also, etc). Something about Floyd's Fowler's boy comes out, accusations. Jess is out on the road at night and gets beat up." That's the idea...but I'm leaving out some details as a matter of writing here. I don't leave them out in my head though. Until I can tell the story of the play and the story of Jess Wattmore in detail to myself I won't be ready to go on to other work.

Working on "As I Lay Dying."

My perspective as a spectator is gone for this topic, replaced by my sense of being a performer. Work has started on a stage adaptation of William Faulkner's novel "As I Lay Dying." We will have to turn brilliant poetic explanation and discription into living dramatic action. Somehow. And not that a collection of talent automatically makes for a good or meaningful or engaging production, BUT...it does bring excitement to the beginning of the work. I'm happy at rehearsal to be in the presence of actors with the kind of deep instinctual abilities that our cast has. What will come of it and where we will take it remains to be seen. I'll be in touch.

"Physical Comedy" Workshop

If you are in Tucson during the month of October, I suggest you check out the following workshop. Matt and Angela (the instructors) are wonderful people, you won't find better, and terrific teachers.


For Immediate Release—21 September 2011

TRAINING IN “PHYSICAL COMEDY” TO BE HELD AT THE ROGUE THEATRE
TUCSON— Through the month of October, The Rogue Theatre will sponsor “Physical Comedy: A Beginner’s Intensive,” led by Matt Walley & Angela Horchem, graduates of the Dell’Arte International School of Physical Theatre.

“Physical Comedy: A Beginner’s Intensive” focuses on the realm of the eccentric character and his or her hilarious interactions with the surrounding physical world. Inspiration comes from archetypes: It’s the Trickster, in control and always stepping out of danger. It’s the Fool, always failing miserably and getting up to try again--to the delight of the audience! It’s Bill Irwin, Carol Burnett or the timeless appeal of Lucille Ball, Buster Keaton, and the Looney Tunes. These are just a few names from the vast realm of eccentric character and physical comedy.

The training will begin with character creation and physical principles--such as slips, trips, falls--and move on to explore relationships and status. By the end of the course, all participants will create a unique character using voice, movement, and costume. On October 22, participants will share their collaborative process with their family and friends in an original showing.

Participants should be age 15 or older. The entire four-session course costs $160. For more information about course content, eligibility, or to register, please contact Angela Horchem: theroguetheatretucson@gmail.com.

Matt Walley & Angela Horchem graduated from the Dell’Arte International School of Physical Theatre where they studied Commedia dell’Arte, mask, clown, acrobatics, and movement. They have appeared on stages across the country from New York to Chicago to California. Their flagship production, I Hate ♥, marked their first foray into the realm they call “Cartoon Theatre,” and was met with wide celebration among its initial audiences. In Tucson, they have worked with various companies including The Rogue Theatre, Live Theatre Workshop, Pinnacle Peak Pistoleros, and Stories that Soar! among others. Whether approaching Shakespeare or an original, devised work, they bring a passion for character, love for the physical, and spirit of exploration and discovery.

###

WHAT: “Physical Comedy: A Beginner’s Intensive” led by Matt Walley & Angela Horchem
WHO: Participants ages 15 and up; first-come, first-serve basis
WHEN: Saturdays, Oct 01, 08, 15, & 22 from 12-4 PM; Final performance October 22 at 4 PM
WHERE: The Rogue Theatre, 300 E University Blvd, Suite 150
ON-SITE CONTACT: Angela Horchem, 347.870.9834