MixTape Intro

I'm overdue to write about Mixtape at Live Theatre Workshop Etcetera Series. This is a show performed by Theatre3, featuring Angela Horchem and Matt Walley. Let it be said that I am partial to the work of Angela and Matt. I have my reasons and they are good ones. I may tell you about them along the way, but for now I have a short list of random thoughts and ideas to express - some directly related to Mixtape, some a few degrees of separation away, and others that are probably temporary manifestations in my mind. I will get to Mixtape starting in my next post but I need these few preliminaries for starters. O.K. here goes... British Theatre wants to be all intellectually talky. ("Its all in the words, love."). Italian Theatre is all over-the-top dramatic, emoting and buffoonery. French Theatre wants to be all silent and profound. They are like "oooh, Ges -ture, Ges-ture!" Russian Theatre tries to be a walking soul. German Theatre is really politics. American Theatre wants to be a social cause. And the rest of the world is just masks and ritual and things like that. All true enough on some level. Right? I hhhhhaaaattttteee the performance space at Live Theatre Workshop! It's always cold. It's dingy. Claustrophobic. Painted life-sucking black. The psychic energy is shaky at best. They sell candy in the lobby. Clowns disturb me. How difficult is joy to manifest in theatre performance? It's difficult. Very difficult. What constitutes "Silence" in theatre performance? My mind is clearer already!

Coming along slowly and personally now

I've been busy trying to piece together and understand the series of events that make up the actual play on the stage. And of course along with that comes the question of what is my character doing? What is the action, as we like to say? In the rehearsal room we have had the dicsussions of the essential facts and circumstances and we are working out the general physical world and movement of the play. We are "inside" the parameters and suggestions of the written script. The characters actions slowly get put in place, behaviorally, pieced together logically, in detail. I list them out or tell them to myself in the narrative. For example," I walk in, listening for sounds outside. I set down my notes and pick up the penny flute. My mind is thinking about whether or not I want to be alone, and trying not to think of the possibility of being beaten again. I try to play a song on the recorder, almost by habit. I feel pain in my mouth, a small taste of blood. A sigh hurts my broken ribs, pain. I set the recorder down and go to the sink to rinse my mouth out. I am listening to the recordings that I have made, tapedeck playing. I feel anxious. I rinse my mouth, trying to sooth myself and relax. I go back to the table. I turn off the tapedeck. I sit down." This "discription" of behavior, this narrative, eventually becomes my personal "script" or "text" you might say. Mine are always soaked in activities of the senses, thoughts, and images in the mind. What I create there, in those realms, should give rise to the words provided to my character by the playwright. The process of creating this working "text" for myself is slow, detailed, and full of trial and error. As I am working on it, I begin to develop an artistic point of view so to speak - a kind of general sense of purpose about the kind character I am making and why. I begin to harbor hopes and aspirations about what I might be able to artistically achieve and convey to the spectators. By now I have taken in the playwrights work pretty fully, and have been earnest in appreciating and trying to understand it. It's the beginning of melding my own creativity in with it now. It's personal. Very, very personal. On many levels. Mind you, this doesn't imply or mean private or unspeakable or something like that. It just means connected and intentionally so - having a stake or desire in what I am doing. I want a character that is enjoyable and complex and meaningful, for myself and for the spectators. And so this is how I am proceeding

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.