Does it remain possible to create six, female characters from a monologue written for a man? This is a challenge, which we took upon ourselves when working on Mark Ravenhills product. I will discuss further, how I worked through this task, when applying practitioners such as Bertolt Brecht and also Konstantin Stanislavski. When beginning to work on the text I was most apprehensive, this became evident early on in the rehearsal process, as we were challenging ourselves in creating convincing lifelike characters. An additional challenge that we came across was enabling the piece to look as though it had been written for a cast of six diverse females.
By dialogically teasing through the text, we began to create characters through the distribution of lines. Once we had all given a small number of lines, there began to be characters forming. I found that the process became a great deal easier, as the character ‘James’ is going through a thought process throughout the whole piece. “This is for the towers. This is for civilisation this is for all of us, you bastards… you don’t say that you don’t do that.” (Ravenhill, 2006, p.59) These two contradicting statements, which one character spoke, are James own thought waves. He is thinking aloud throughout, without processing what he is actually saying. Due to Mark Ravenhill writing this monologue in this way, we then are enabled to create two diverse characters from one, with ease.
Once our cast had established, who was saying which lines, we then felt that we had the beginning foundation to our character. However, we were still not any closer to creating individual characters, with their own personalities. A way in which our cast approached this task was deciding an appropriate practition...
... middle of paper ...
... anyway that you deem correct, as everyone has their own theories thus meaning that the piece is not necessarily ‘doomed to failure’.
Bibliography
Brecht, B. Mueller, C (1964). Document Series. Notes on Stanislavski. Drama Review Vol.9, No.2. MIT Press. p159.
Gale, M. Deeney, J (2010). The Routledge Drama Anthology and Sourcebook. Brecht, B (1938). The Street Scene. Oxon: Routledge. p470-472.
McGaw, C. Stilson, K. (2011). Acting is Believing . 11th ed. Boston. USA : Cengage Learning. p259.
Ravenhill, M (2006). The cut and Product. London: Methuen Publishing Limited. p59-62.
Sawyer, M (2005). Think of it as Bridget Jones goes Jihad. The Guardian.
Stanislavski, K (1937). An actor Prepares. London: Geoffrey Bles Ltd. p164.
Stanislavski, K (2008). An Actor's Work. Oxon: Routledge. p154-164.
Stanislavski, K (1950). Building a Character. London: Max Reinhardt Ltd. p21.
Characterization entails a keen and concise analysis into the way a writer reveals the traits of a character in a play or a movie. The persona of the characters gets portrayed in either direct or indirect manner throughout the movie in line with a character’s development and likely environmental effects. Direct characterization occurs when specific character traits are relayed expressly to the audience while indirect characterization occurs through an intense reflective analysis of the speech, looks, appearances, relationships, actions and thoughts of a character. These include instances of dialogue as well as actions by different characters within the movie. Fundamentally, these aspects have been brought to life by David Anspaugh’s Rudy and the following paper attempts to shed light on the specifics. Rudy is a character that inspires hope through hardships, unwavering will and determination through risks and hardships in pursuit of one’s dreams and these qualities are unique compared to most
Lowerison, Jean. “Theater Review: The Liar.” SDGLN. 02 Apr. 2014: 1. Web. 28 Apr. 2014.
The triviality of melodrama is so often the theatrical scapegoat that boils the blood of the modern-day critic: the sentimental monologues, the martyred young lovers, the triumphant hero, and the self-indulgent imagery. Melodrama would seem the ultimate taboo; another failed Shakespearean staging or even worse, an opera minus the pretty music. Ironically, Bertolt Brecht, dramatic revolutionary and cynic of all things contrived found promise in the melodramatic presentation. Brecht examined and manipulated the various superficial and spectacular aspects of theatre, establishing a synthesis of entertainment and social criticism as his fundamental goal. Bertolt Brecht employs various facets of melodramatic technique in The Jewish Wife, ultimately reconfiguring the genre and conveying his central theme; a society rendered immobile at the will of a totalitarian regime.
The acting itself is seen as both exaggerated and over-the-top, by which past and present actors try to employ in carrying out Shakespeare’s plays (Britannica). Shakespeare meant for his audience to be engaged throughout the entirety of the play. The uniqueness and shear passion of the plays have helped in the continuum of their success.
Goldman, Emma. The Social Significance of the Modern Drama. Berkeley. Edu, n.d. Web. 09 May 2012.
Lazarus, Joan. "On the Verge of Change: New Directions in Secondary Theatre Education." Applied Theatre Research 3.2 (July 2015): 149-161. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1386/atr.3.2.149_1.
Bertolt Brecht was a theorist and innovator whose expansively influential work is, sadly, beyond the limited scope of this paper. What we must focus on is only one facet of his thought o...
Good acting relies on a kinesthetic, an intrapersonal, and an interpersonal intelligence, all of which work together to form a creative expression. There exist limitless styles of acting; there is always something to learn.
Bertolt Brecht and Constantin Stanislavski are regarded as two of the most influential practitioners of the twentieth century, both with strong opinions and ideas about the function of the theatre and the actors within it. Both theories are considered useful and are used throughout the world as a means to achieve a good piece of theatre. The fact that both are so well respected is probably the only obvious similarity as their work is almost of complete opposites.
Gainor, J. Ellen., Stanton B. Garner, and Martin Puchner. The Norton Anthology of Drama, Shorter Edition. New York: W. W. Norton &, 2010. Print.
Eugen Berthold Friedrich Brecht, (b.1898-d.1956), known commonly as Bertolt Brecht, was a German poet and playwright. One of his major contributions to theatre history was the “alienation effect” (From the German, “Verfremdungseffekt”). Brechtian alienation requires the removal of the “fourth wall.” This is a term that describes the “suspension of disbelief” by the audience that takes place during a performance. It is often thought that the audience looks in on the play’s action through an invisible wall, just as the audience during a performance is focused upon a procenium stage. This is a literal and figurative term. The audience pretends that the characters in the story are actually alive, living in their own world instead of actors performing on a stage. In order for the fourth wall to remain intact, the actors must also, in effect, pretend that the audience does not exist, by staying in character at all times and by not addressing the audience members directly.
Willett, John, trans. and ed. Brecht on Theatre: The Development of an Aesthetic. New York: Hill and Wang, 1986.
The ideas of Bertolt Brecht (1898-1965) changed the theatre in many ways. Brecht along with Erwin Piscator developed the style of Epic theatre style contrasting to previous accepted styles. Presentational in form, Epic theatre is a vehicle for social comment through techniques such as: alienation, historification, eclectic influences (highly Asian), constructivism in scenery, disjointed and illogical scene placement, ordinary clothing and lighting, the use of music to detach the audience from emotion, placards and signs and projected images. Didactic in nature Brecht’s works aim to challenge the audience to assess socially accepted norms and educate them to injustices often overlooked by the public. The Caucasian Chalk Circle (Brecht, 1944) written during the time of Nazi Germany occupation has a clearly political and social focus.
“Acting is not about being someone different. It’s finding the similarity in what is apparently different, then finding myself in there.” ― Meryl Streep. I love exploring and gaining knowledge about the beautiful craft of acting. During my journey of being an actor, I notice there are two types of actors: stage and film. Stage and film actors are different in their times of rehearsal, their relationship with an audience, and their emotional challenges.
the process of creating this production, we had to make several crucial decisions that impacted how everything turned out. Many of these things involved how we would represent each character. We made decisions based on how each character was feeling in that moment and what caused them to feel that way in the previous scene. We made many vital choices that brought our whole performance together.