| Picture showing "simple body sequences" in the play |
Description
On friday april 12th, we went to see "Proyección Privada. Directed by Gilbert Rouviere and starring well known actors such as Jimena Lindo, Norma Martinez and Miguel Iza. The comedy shows television as the main aggressor and "pretext of escape" in human relations.
It conveys (as we agreed in class as a possible concept) the idea of consumption from the two sides. People's consumption of TV and the TV's consumption of people and relations.
It conveys (as we agreed in class as a possible concept) the idea of consumption from the two sides. People's consumption of TV and the TV's consumption of people and relations.
The director tries to use different modern(ist?) conventions and techniques. However, they do not necessarily respond correctly to an exploration process to achieve an interesting effect and response in the audience, but seem to be there because they are "modal" tendencies in occidental directing.
Analysis
Some examples of this techniques or conventions could be the following:
Theatre of the Absurd:
It is absurd that the man does not know the name of his own wife (influence from Harold Pinter here), and doesn't even know they don't have children. The play is a comedy, so absurd jokes as these could work at the beginning, but when they become repetitive the audience gets bored and sees them as (may I use spanish) chongos monses.
Theatre of the Absurd:
It is absurd that the man does not know the name of his own wife (influence from Harold Pinter here), and doesn't even know they don't have children. The play is a comedy, so absurd jokes as these could work at the beginning, but when they become repetitive the audience gets bored and sees them as (may I use spanish) chongos monses.
This teaches us that we don't have to underestimate the audience. If we keep making "easy" jokes in comedies the audience will eventually get bored, because there aren't 'hiden' messages or things there to analyse.
If you want to make an absurd play, I believe you need to make sure that EVERYTHING there is absurd, including the set design and acting. However, not everything in this play was "absurd", and some things such as set design even TRIED to be "realistic" (as for the walls and the couch). However... this 'mixture' didn't work at the end. If the jokes worked in the audience only at first (as in my case), maybe they should have done them only when the man appeared to be drunk, in order to give coherence to their use.
Theatre of images:
With the body sequences and the use of masks, the play tried to transmit the idea of dehumanization (due to technology and routine). However, this sequences were definitely repetitive and boring for the audience, as they didn't show us interesting choreographies or movements but extremely simple sequences that became monotone.
Theatre "of images" requires a different type of work, that has a purpose and a visual impact in the audience. However...The only effect the "dream-like" scenes in the play created was sleepiness.
If you want to make an absurd play, I believe you need to make sure that EVERYTHING there is absurd, including the set design and acting. However, not everything in this play was "absurd", and some things such as set design even TRIED to be "realistic" (as for the walls and the couch). However... this 'mixture' didn't work at the end. If the jokes worked in the audience only at first (as in my case), maybe they should have done them only when the man appeared to be drunk, in order to give coherence to their use.
Theatre of images:
With the body sequences and the use of masks, the play tried to transmit the idea of dehumanization (due to technology and routine). However, this sequences were definitely repetitive and boring for the audience, as they didn't show us interesting choreographies or movements but extremely simple sequences that became monotone.
Theatre "of images" requires a different type of work, that has a purpose and a visual impact in the audience. However...The only effect the "dream-like" scenes in the play created was sleepiness.
Connections
A matter of dissection: I remember telling our director that the audience probably wouldn't understand our jokes, but he always told us we should never underestimate them. Theatre should make you think and analyse. It shouldn't give you everything, it shouldn't underestimate the audience's capacity and intelligence.
The slapsticks in this play were sequences that matched with the play's mood and style, and were there for their EFFECT and not just because we wanted to use the technique. We realized it is common for comedy, and it was used because of its contribution with dynamism and amusement for the audience.
Confesiones de Ana Correa: The body sequence made by Ana Correa when representing Yerma did have a purpose and clear effect on stage. It achieved to cause SENSATIONS (such as the fetus) in the audience not only because of her body expression, but thanks to the sound effects and the textures used.
Here, strong imaged did have an impact, while the body sequence used in Proyección Privada was monotone and "effect-less" in the end.
Here, strong imaged did have an impact, while the body sequence used in Proyección Privada was monotone and "effect-less" in the end.
La falsa criada: Here, items and scenery were placed on stage just because they "looked nice", but didn't really work all-together. They were too fixed (no imagination expected from the audience), and didn't follow a concept.
Reflection
As a director, if you choose a technique or convention on stage, you should put it there because of the EFFECT it will cause in the audience and not because it is common or "modal".
Directors should always give coherence to plays with a:
1. Direction concept
2. Acting concept
3. Design concept
1. Direction concept
2. Acting concept
3. Design concept
And should look for techniques that join together or work for the play's style, without using them "just for the sake of it".
Could we establish a (kind of) concept for the techniques used in a play?
Moreover, as we are also learning in the school play rehearsals, different actors have different advantages and ways of working, and it is one of the roles of the director to exploit them to the best limit. (If you have actors that can't certainly perform complex body sequences, don't try making simpler ones just to have a sequence in the play.) The obstacles we find (even in our actors) should not be limits in the end.
1. When you don't describe appropriately what you are analyzing, then any conclusion goes. Make sure your appreciations are done with more rigour, so your value judgements can rely on groundings that justify them.
ResponderEliminar2. Our actors' characteristics should only be seen as challenges and possibilities for creation, rather than as obstacles.
Roberto