January 2015
Very serious topic even though the title is a little trifling. Courage in the Arts community.
APEX Theater in Tyler recently was evicted from their digs because they had begun rehearsals on a 100+ year old show that dealt with oppression of sexuality, youth, and consequences. The show, Spring Awakening, "criticizes the sexually-oppressive culture of 19th century Germany [and today] and offers a vivid dramatization of the erotic fantasies that it breeds. Due to the controversial subject matter- puberty, sexuality, rape, child abuse, homosexuality, suicide, and abortion- the play has often been banned, altered, or censored."- Wikipedia Part of its controversial nature is the sometimes very graphic nature of the acts portrayed along with the nudity of the actors playing minors. It takes a lot of courage to attempt this play in the middle of the Bible belt. But courage alone doesn't make it right.
I support courageous theatre. Plays that push the comfort zones of patrons to make a social or political point, or to challenge norms can be the only way to get serious conversations going. If you never push, your schedule becomes near pandering only. Financially safe. Socially safe. But not brave. However, you have to be able to produce the show to push the limits. People have to come see the action on the boards to feel excited, challenged, angry, enthralled, hopeful, joyous, or whatever the point of the show is. Here is where wisdom comes into play...along with balance and community sensitivity. One must always keep a weather eye on the climate in which the play is being produced.
A small group heard about the play and put pressure on to stop the show. News media, smelling a scandal, took up the small story and blew it up as large as they could. Other outlets took up the story making it hard for "community leaders" to ignore the tempest in a teapot turned full on media gale. The storm threatened not just the play but the ship that carried it, APEX. They caved. The city caved...the theater caved... and the media and the vocal minority relished the collapses. In the end, a city government official who happened to be the landlord of the theater decided to evict the thespians. They have since decided to build their own theater where at least that threat is gone.
It is always a hard experience...rejection. You have re-examine your actions and motives, their actions and motives, and the path where it all led. When do you "cave in" to community groups and standards? When do you stand your ground? When are your decisions courageous, and when are they hubris? No one can answer that for you. You must decide that for yourself.
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
Thursday, October 16, 2014
Chicken Fried Tuna
October 15, 2014
It has been a long time since my last post. And that has been intentional. I stand before you a coward. Six months have passed, and I still am gathering courage to tell the truth. I have been afraid to offend...even people that don't really care about what I write or say... and I have been loathe to hurt feelings. We in the arts have such delicate egos at the best of times.
But it's time to saddle up and ride the wild keyboard. Last weekend saw the close of a six show performance of Greater Tuna at the Texas Theatre in beautiful downtown Palestine, Texas. The show was decently attended and well received. I was happily one of the two actors on stage in this production. The other was Gerry Goodwin. I have wanted to do this show...with Gerry...for a while now. We are a Mutt and Jeff pair that fit the casting to a sweet tea. I really wanted to do this show to see if I still could. It's a very challenging show full of rapidly shifting characterizations and costumes. Voices, postures, facial tics, movements all change even more rapidly than the clothes. Gerry was amazing. His comic timing... flawless. His pathos... heart-wrenching. He is always a pleasure to work with. I struggled, as we older actors sometimes do, but I feel in the end I did credit to the material, the theatre, and my costar.
When I say the show was well received, I was giving faint praise. Each performance saw someone gasping for breath from laughter. We had a woman nearly fall out of her chair...literally. A man complained that his ribs hurt. One woman, as she exited the theater paid us what I consider the creme of compliments: She told us that she remembered seeing us perform the show several years ago in Austin and thought we were still at least as funny now. She thought we were the originators of the award winning show! My hat size expanded exponentially.
None of this would have been possible without several heroic people serving in the shadows. Of course Carol Moore, our talented director is first on the list. Her vision and drive and passion made the show a reality. But I must really applaud our "Tuna Helpers"- the backstage ladies who dressed us in seconds, kept our costumes and changes straight, and never sent us out as the wrong character. And don't forget lights and sound. And the set design and construction. Oh the armies of Thespis thundered along.
Anyway, I'm back. I'll be writing more now that I have regained at least a modicum of spine. See you on the boards.
It has been a long time since my last post. And that has been intentional. I stand before you a coward. Six months have passed, and I still am gathering courage to tell the truth. I have been afraid to offend...even people that don't really care about what I write or say... and I have been loathe to hurt feelings. We in the arts have such delicate egos at the best of times.
But it's time to saddle up and ride the wild keyboard. Last weekend saw the close of a six show performance of Greater Tuna at the Texas Theatre in beautiful downtown Palestine, Texas. The show was decently attended and well received. I was happily one of the two actors on stage in this production. The other was Gerry Goodwin. I have wanted to do this show...with Gerry...for a while now. We are a Mutt and Jeff pair that fit the casting to a sweet tea. I really wanted to do this show to see if I still could. It's a very challenging show full of rapidly shifting characterizations and costumes. Voices, postures, facial tics, movements all change even more rapidly than the clothes. Gerry was amazing. His comic timing... flawless. His pathos... heart-wrenching. He is always a pleasure to work with. I struggled, as we older actors sometimes do, but I feel in the end I did credit to the material, the theatre, and my costar.
 |
| Aunt Pearl and Vera Carp of Greater Tuna |
None of this would have been possible without several heroic people serving in the shadows. Of course Carol Moore, our talented director is first on the list. Her vision and drive and passion made the show a reality. But I must really applaud our "Tuna Helpers"- the backstage ladies who dressed us in seconds, kept our costumes and changes straight, and never sent us out as the wrong character. And don't forget lights and sound. And the set design and construction. Oh the armies of Thespis thundered along.
Anyway, I'm back. I'll be writing more now that I have regained at least a modicum of spine. See you on the boards.
Sunday, April 13, 2014
Theatre and Bullies and Taking a stand
This blog-post will offend several people. I must accept it and move on.
When I was young, I was the victim of bullying. Not once nor by one person, but throughout my younger years in several different cities and towns. I have witnessed bullying of and by others who were around me. Sometimes I acted, sometimes not. I tell you this so that you will understand where I come from. Knowing this may change how you perceive what I am saying.
That's the disclaimer. Now to the heart of the story.
A play in a nearby town was marred by threats of violence and bullying to the point where a child was excluded from the show.
Many bullied children end up in the arts. It is a refuge for many of the fringe: the different and the sensitive ones. Band kids become a gang looking out for each other. Journalism, Art, Choir, and Dance also join that list of protective gangs. Like them, theatre can be a refuge for the disenfranchised or picked-on youth. I was not physically weak, but I was smart and sensitive- a combination too tasty for the hyenas of public school to resist. So, although I played ball some and rode cross-country bicycle, I was bullied, and I also found my way to choir and band and theater.
Adults always had the same or similar response, "They're just playing." or "Don't be such a baby." or "He/she didn't mean anything by it." or "So and so would never do something like that. He's a good kid." or "That never happened." Denial was the word for the day. Deny it happened. Deny it was bad. Deny they meant to hurt. Deny you're worth defending. The Arts are supposed to be a refuge where the different can take those differences and soar.
But that's not always the case. Pettiness and jealousy, hierarchism and bullying will find their way into nearly any group. I have seen it myself. I have heard it done. As kids we are near powerless to do anything about it, no matter what anti-bullying programs aim to do. It is the adults who must step in and protect those who cannot protect themselves, and denial is never going to help. Turning a blind eye never stops it. Unfortunately, aggressive attacks also don't stop it. It takes time and patience and a firm hand to halt the practice even if only for a while.
That lands us back to the play in a respected theater in the next town over. I heard about the problems from four different sources. With such an emotional issue, even a trusted source by itself isn't enough. The play has an all boy cast. Notice not men...boys. They ranged in age from very young to college age. The director is himself of the same age as the older "boys". The show features a lot of violence and violent talk and attitudes. These pumped up feelings spilled over into the dressing rooms and beyond. Anti-gay taunting aimed at a child with gay parents. Threats of explosives and weapons. Actual weapons brought into that emotional mix. When a parent felt the threat was too much, she was dismissed with all the denials mentioned above. When she would not be dismissed, she was threatened with the police if she did not leave, and since she felt could not trust leaving her son there unatttended (unprotected), they left. She had pushed too hard.
According to those in charge, they had handled it. The "he is a good kid" "I know his parents" scenario. This parent, not knowing those people and knowing that not everyone had been interviewed about the incidents, did not trust that it was enough. The other person was offended by that and felt authority threatened. Escalation to the point that we now have adults bullying adults. The child suffered. The show suffered. Nobody wins.
That's the way it is with bullying: Nobody ever really wins. Not even the bully.
I was not there. I spoke to some of those involved and got conflicting stories in some areas and overlap in others. What I know is that reputations have been harmed, the theater is harmed, and people have been harmed. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can break my soul."
When I was young, I was the victim of bullying. Not once nor by one person, but throughout my younger years in several different cities and towns. I have witnessed bullying of and by others who were around me. Sometimes I acted, sometimes not. I tell you this so that you will understand where I come from. Knowing this may change how you perceive what I am saying.
That's the disclaimer. Now to the heart of the story.
A play in a nearby town was marred by threats of violence and bullying to the point where a child was excluded from the show.
Many bullied children end up in the arts. It is a refuge for many of the fringe: the different and the sensitive ones. Band kids become a gang looking out for each other. Journalism, Art, Choir, and Dance also join that list of protective gangs. Like them, theatre can be a refuge for the disenfranchised or picked-on youth. I was not physically weak, but I was smart and sensitive- a combination too tasty for the hyenas of public school to resist. So, although I played ball some and rode cross-country bicycle, I was bullied, and I also found my way to choir and band and theater.
Adults always had the same or similar response, "They're just playing." or "Don't be such a baby." or "He/she didn't mean anything by it." or "So and so would never do something like that. He's a good kid." or "That never happened." Denial was the word for the day. Deny it happened. Deny it was bad. Deny they meant to hurt. Deny you're worth defending. The Arts are supposed to be a refuge where the different can take those differences and soar.
But that's not always the case. Pettiness and jealousy, hierarchism and bullying will find their way into nearly any group. I have seen it myself. I have heard it done. As kids we are near powerless to do anything about it, no matter what anti-bullying programs aim to do. It is the adults who must step in and protect those who cannot protect themselves, and denial is never going to help. Turning a blind eye never stops it. Unfortunately, aggressive attacks also don't stop it. It takes time and patience and a firm hand to halt the practice even if only for a while.
That lands us back to the play in a respected theater in the next town over. I heard about the problems from four different sources. With such an emotional issue, even a trusted source by itself isn't enough. The play has an all boy cast. Notice not men...boys. They ranged in age from very young to college age. The director is himself of the same age as the older "boys". The show features a lot of violence and violent talk and attitudes. These pumped up feelings spilled over into the dressing rooms and beyond. Anti-gay taunting aimed at a child with gay parents. Threats of explosives and weapons. Actual weapons brought into that emotional mix. When a parent felt the threat was too much, she was dismissed with all the denials mentioned above. When she would not be dismissed, she was threatened with the police if she did not leave, and since she felt could not trust leaving her son there unatttended (unprotected), they left. She had pushed too hard.
According to those in charge, they had handled it. The "he is a good kid" "I know his parents" scenario. This parent, not knowing those people and knowing that not everyone had been interviewed about the incidents, did not trust that it was enough. The other person was offended by that and felt authority threatened. Escalation to the point that we now have adults bullying adults. The child suffered. The show suffered. Nobody wins.
That's the way it is with bullying: Nobody ever really wins. Not even the bully.
I was not there. I spoke to some of those involved and got conflicting stories in some areas and overlap in others. What I know is that reputations have been harmed, the theater is harmed, and people have been harmed. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can break my soul."
Lord of the Flies...Tyler Civic Theatre
This review was delayed several days by no access to the blog during that time. I apologize for the delay to all involved in the show.
I did not like the book Lord of the Flies by William Golding when I read it in high school. I liked it only slightly less when I re-read it in college. Don't get me wrong, it is a well written book. The British public school boys stranded on an island becoming a less than subtle metaphor for what men become without the constraints of "society". It is a disturbing book without a happy or even satisfying ending. It is disturbing because it cuts to the bone.
The play, produced by Tyler Civic Theatre and directed by Justin Purser, maintains that uncomfortable atmosphere and tone. It is, of course, a condensed and edited version of the book for brevity, but it is not edited much for content. The violence, the savagery, the loss of humanity are all there. It is not a play for the young and immature. It is a play to stimulate conversation and introspection, not to entertain. The intensity of some of the actors and the haunting staging brought a raw edge to the play, even though it included several very young actors.
Mark Becker (Jack) was intense and convincing as the pathological leader of the savage boys. His dominant character sets the tone for those violent episodes. The one flaw in his performance is the sudden shift from stuffy would-be leader to tribal chief without the descent visible to the audience. That may have been due to script or director's choice. Malick Absy (Roger) submitted a rather understated performance though only those familiar with the book would know it. He started out the normal schoolboy and more gradually became the crazed enforcer. In the book, Roger is near psychotic when his suppressed rage is unleashed without the strictures of organized social order. Absy doesn't take it to that extreme. James Burns (Piggy) did a marvelous job portraying the voice of ignored reason. The point is quite obvious that reason and rules go out the window when there appear to be no consequences beyond the now, as these boys felt. I was a bit disappointed in the performance of Ryan Castner (Ralph). Castner portrayed Ralph as weak and ineffectual character. That is interpretation, however. What bothered me more was the "one note", far too level performance. There weren't enough levels to his work. Again that could be the actor or the director. Owen Harrison (Simon) gave an uneven performance as the innocent sacrificial lamb of the story. Simon represents innocence and the vulnerability of common sense to the story. At times he was good, then at times bland.
Among the other boys, most were adequate with few stand-outs. One that stood out in a negative way was a boy who's name I never got. They did not call him by name clearly in the play so I cannot connect it to the actor. (I did not see him afterwards in the meet and greet.) One of the older (at least larger) boys in the show, his acting was way way over the top. It wasn't convincing within the context and tone of this show. It rather distracted me whenever he began chewing the scenery. The "Litluns" were okay, though at time hard to hear. That I attribute mostly to age and experience.
The look of the production was quite good. A nicely designed and executed stage with a very effective use of lighting and sound were directly attributable to the director Justin Purser. They all worked together to create a mood of tense foreboding followed by stark danger. The costumes as time passed in the play could have been more ragged and dirty. They became "stage ragged" but not dirty...some still had creases from their newness. A problem I pointed out later was that the first row of seats stage right and especially left needed to be roped off. A young audience member was less than a foot from getting conked with a spear at one point. Hopefully that was corrected in later performances.
Overall a good production of a dark and violent play. I would not take anyone under the age of 10 at minimum to see the show unless you were prepared to start a conversation about what had just happened and why. It is harsh. It is brutal...just as the author intended.
I did not like the book Lord of the Flies by William Golding when I read it in high school. I liked it only slightly less when I re-read it in college. Don't get me wrong, it is a well written book. The British public school boys stranded on an island becoming a less than subtle metaphor for what men become without the constraints of "society". It is a disturbing book without a happy or even satisfying ending. It is disturbing because it cuts to the bone.
The play, produced by Tyler Civic Theatre and directed by Justin Purser, maintains that uncomfortable atmosphere and tone. It is, of course, a condensed and edited version of the book for brevity, but it is not edited much for content. The violence, the savagery, the loss of humanity are all there. It is not a play for the young and immature. It is a play to stimulate conversation and introspection, not to entertain. The intensity of some of the actors and the haunting staging brought a raw edge to the play, even though it included several very young actors.
Mark Becker (Jack) was intense and convincing as the pathological leader of the savage boys. His dominant character sets the tone for those violent episodes. The one flaw in his performance is the sudden shift from stuffy would-be leader to tribal chief without the descent visible to the audience. That may have been due to script or director's choice. Malick Absy (Roger) submitted a rather understated performance though only those familiar with the book would know it. He started out the normal schoolboy and more gradually became the crazed enforcer. In the book, Roger is near psychotic when his suppressed rage is unleashed without the strictures of organized social order. Absy doesn't take it to that extreme. James Burns (Piggy) did a marvelous job portraying the voice of ignored reason. The point is quite obvious that reason and rules go out the window when there appear to be no consequences beyond the now, as these boys felt. I was a bit disappointed in the performance of Ryan Castner (Ralph). Castner portrayed Ralph as weak and ineffectual character. That is interpretation, however. What bothered me more was the "one note", far too level performance. There weren't enough levels to his work. Again that could be the actor or the director. Owen Harrison (Simon) gave an uneven performance as the innocent sacrificial lamb of the story. Simon represents innocence and the vulnerability of common sense to the story. At times he was good, then at times bland.
Among the other boys, most were adequate with few stand-outs. One that stood out in a negative way was a boy who's name I never got. They did not call him by name clearly in the play so I cannot connect it to the actor. (I did not see him afterwards in the meet and greet.) One of the older (at least larger) boys in the show, his acting was way way over the top. It wasn't convincing within the context and tone of this show. It rather distracted me whenever he began chewing the scenery. The "Litluns" were okay, though at time hard to hear. That I attribute mostly to age and experience.
The look of the production was quite good. A nicely designed and executed stage with a very effective use of lighting and sound were directly attributable to the director Justin Purser. They all worked together to create a mood of tense foreboding followed by stark danger. The costumes as time passed in the play could have been more ragged and dirty. They became "stage ragged" but not dirty...some still had creases from their newness. A problem I pointed out later was that the first row of seats stage right and especially left needed to be roped off. A young audience member was less than a foot from getting conked with a spear at one point. Hopefully that was corrected in later performances.
Overall a good production of a dark and violent play. I would not take anyone under the age of 10 at minimum to see the show unless you were prepared to start a conversation about what had just happened and why. It is harsh. It is brutal...just as the author intended.
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
Reviewing the Reviewer
I had a nice online conversation with an actor I had reviewed less than kindly today. He was very gracious and professional about it. As I said to him, if I start to fake or water down my reviews just because someone is a friend or colleague, then the review means nothing. This way, if I give you a good review, you'll know I mean that, too.
But the whole idea began rolling around in my head. The old "Who Watches the Watchmen" idea. With that in mind, I would like to re-examine me as reviewer.
For example, I made a point of saying that my wife laughed most of the way through...rather loudly I didn't say. I mentioned that I found many parts "laugh out loud funny". That was written as an audience member. But as I continued to read, I realized that much of the review was written as an actor/director. That is a dangerous trap to be in. I consciously try to be objective. I try to be fair. I try not to cut my throat with the people I'm reviewing. But somewhere in the cobwebbed passages of my labyrinthine brain, there are voices saying, "If only I'd directed this." and "If I were the actor, I would have..." There will be a faint odour of that from any reviewer.
Ultimately I am who I am. I try to be honest and true and tell my opinion (yes, only and opinion). I am flawed so my reviews are flawed. I'm smart so my reviews are generally good. Whether they match your taste and experience, only time and shared experience will tell.
To any and all I offend- this was not my purpose. To those I have enlightened- you're welcome. To those I have merely entertained- pass along this blog address and have a great life. Leave your comments below.
But the whole idea began rolling around in my head. The old "Who Watches the Watchmen" idea. With that in mind, I would like to re-examine me as reviewer.
For example, I made a point of saying that my wife laughed most of the way through...rather loudly I didn't say. I mentioned that I found many parts "laugh out loud funny". That was written as an audience member. But as I continued to read, I realized that much of the review was written as an actor/director. That is a dangerous trap to be in. I consciously try to be objective. I try to be fair. I try not to cut my throat with the people I'm reviewing. But somewhere in the cobwebbed passages of my labyrinthine brain, there are voices saying, "If only I'd directed this." and "If I were the actor, I would have..." There will be a faint odour of that from any reviewer.
Ultimately I am who I am. I try to be honest and true and tell my opinion (yes, only and opinion). I am flawed so my reviews are flawed. I'm smart so my reviews are generally good. Whether they match your taste and experience, only time and shared experience will tell.
To any and all I offend- this was not my purpose. To those I have enlightened- you're welcome. To those I have merely entertained- pass along this blog address and have a great life. Leave your comments below.
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
The Mystery of Irma Vep at the Liberty Theatre
In 1996, French film director Olivier Assayas crafted an unusual film called Irma Vep. The title character is of course an anagram of vampire. It is a "film within a film" about a strange remake of the silent era film Les Vampires, a serial 2-reeler crime drama that had nothing to do with the mythological creatures of the title.
But that is all beside the point!
What I really want to talk about is the live performance of The Mystery of Irma Vep by Charles Ludlam as presented by Apex Theatre20 at the Liberty Theatre in Tyler, Texas. Although listed officially as a satire, it becomes a slapstick farce of epic proportions. Imagine Daffy Duck in Wuthering Heights and you get the idea.
Its several characters, both male and female, are portrayed by two male actors. A huge part of the fun is the quick changes- not only of costume, but also character, voice, accent, posture, and boobs. (Sorry about that, but it had to be said.) The play satirizes several genres from Victorian melodrama and horror, to Hitchcock and the Marx Brothers. Throw in some 1930's horror films and you have the tone, or tones, of The Mystery of Irma Vep. Josh Carpenter and Nate McKeller are the heroes who were chosen to undertake the schizoid roles. These two had to carry the entire show as they were everyone. In the program they should have been listed as "I am Legion, for we are many."
Now the review
The show was out loud funny in many many places. Oftentimes that humor is based on the absurdity of the changes. Sometimes it's just the silliness of the action and words. Ultimately the delivery of the characters drives the show. The two actors do well. Carpenter seems to have a good grasp of the off-kilter nature of his characters. He also ad libs well, which both actors had to do to fill change times. The only real flaw in his performance was less differentiation between characters. He is, in himself, a strong character and it is hard to disguise. McKeller had the most changes, which challenged him greatly. Usually up to the challenge, some of his characters were reduced to mugging to the audience. That may have been direction or decision, either way it did not work for me.
The costume changes were a problem, as they were bound to be. There were times where the costumes were obviously beneath (and peeking out) of others. Sometimes that led to more humor, sometimes it killed the joke. I'm not sure if there is a really good way to solve that problem. It is a problem, though.
Overall the show gave the feeling of an amateur show. No one thing is to blame, nor one person. I have worked with both actors before, and they are quite talented. I have seen the director, Felicity Enas, do marvelous things with a cast. We enjoyed the show. We laughed. We giggled. We groaned. It was a good night. I expected more.
But that is all beside the point!
What I really want to talk about is the live performance of The Mystery of Irma Vep by Charles Ludlam as presented by Apex Theatre20 at the Liberty Theatre in Tyler, Texas. Although listed officially as a satire, it becomes a slapstick farce of epic proportions. Imagine Daffy Duck in Wuthering Heights and you get the idea.
Its several characters, both male and female, are portrayed by two male actors. A huge part of the fun is the quick changes- not only of costume, but also character, voice, accent, posture, and boobs. (Sorry about that, but it had to be said.) The play satirizes several genres from Victorian melodrama and horror, to Hitchcock and the Marx Brothers. Throw in some 1930's horror films and you have the tone, or tones, of The Mystery of Irma Vep. Josh Carpenter and Nate McKeller are the heroes who were chosen to undertake the schizoid roles. These two had to carry the entire show as they were everyone. In the program they should have been listed as "I am Legion, for we are many."
Now the review
The show was out loud funny in many many places. Oftentimes that humor is based on the absurdity of the changes. Sometimes it's just the silliness of the action and words. Ultimately the delivery of the characters drives the show. The two actors do well. Carpenter seems to have a good grasp of the off-kilter nature of his characters. He also ad libs well, which both actors had to do to fill change times. The only real flaw in his performance was less differentiation between characters. He is, in himself, a strong character and it is hard to disguise. McKeller had the most changes, which challenged him greatly. Usually up to the challenge, some of his characters were reduced to mugging to the audience. That may have been direction or decision, either way it did not work for me.
The costume changes were a problem, as they were bound to be. There were times where the costumes were obviously beneath (and peeking out) of others. Sometimes that led to more humor, sometimes it killed the joke. I'm not sure if there is a really good way to solve that problem. It is a problem, though.
Overall the show gave the feeling of an amateur show. No one thing is to blame, nor one person. I have worked with both actors before, and they are quite talented. I have seen the director, Felicity Enas, do marvelous things with a cast. We enjoyed the show. We laughed. We giggled. We groaned. It was a good night. I expected more.
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Taking a Chance Again
Here we are, a week before another opening. Ghost of a Chance opens March 28 and runs for two weeks. We're in the crunch time where small things make a difference. We've actually had extra time to learn lines, but it is a wordy play and a long play. The problem I am having is not "too many lines" but rather too much space between entrances. Having a small role means large chunks of time offstage just waiting. It is so easy for me to lose focus at these times- to maintain character and keep my lines straight. I don't appear for nearly an hour into the first act, appearing on in the last three pages. I have a little more in the second act, but the problem is the same- focus.
For an actor, focus is a huge priority. An actor must be able to split their focus successfully into three parts: regurgitating their lines, but with feeling; puppetting yourself to be in the right place at the right moment; and listening truly to your scene partners so as to react as genuinely as possible and to catch variations in their lines that change the scripted lines and require a different response. Lose focus on any of these and you're pulling curtain on the next show instead of taking bows.
On another note: This weekend I will be attending The Mystery of Irma Vep at the Liberty Theatre in downtown Tyler, Texas. It is produced by APEX Theatre20. The review will be my next entry on this blog.
and scene!
For an actor, focus is a huge priority. An actor must be able to split their focus successfully into three parts: regurgitating their lines, but with feeling; puppetting yourself to be in the right place at the right moment; and listening truly to your scene partners so as to react as genuinely as possible and to catch variations in their lines that change the scripted lines and require a different response. Lose focus on any of these and you're pulling curtain on the next show instead of taking bows.
On another note: This weekend I will be attending The Mystery of Irma Vep at the Liberty Theatre in downtown Tyler, Texas. It is produced by APEX Theatre20. The review will be my next entry on this blog.
and scene!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)