Today we performed our rendition of ‘The Visit’ in front of the rest of ‘the Debating Chamber’ cast. I think our first run went well, and the feedback we got confirmed that adding a serious moment at the end including present day politics concerning how money can corrupt was a good contrast to the piece’s humourous quality. This is because the sudden change in tone signifies that an important part of the plot is being unveiled, and the audience are snapped out of the comfortable watching made by our jokes. We also received praise on the beat we created by jingling coins in bags of money, as in doing so we formed a sombre tone reminiscent of a death march. Our combination of light and dark subjects in the ten minutes serves to comment (in my opinion) on the ease of those who have money, and the grim effects it has on the lives of others.
However, we did receive constructive criticism about needing to make more use of gestus, especially in the scenes using extracts from the script because establishing that Claire is a very rich woman, who was once poor, and is dealing with an oafish mayor in front of starving townspeople, comes laden with opportunity to make use of Brechtian technique. Using gestus is also important in terms of showing our understanding of the practitioner, because we make frequent use of techniques that build on the presentation and interpretation of the piece - such as an episodic structure, use of song, and multi roling- but we have yet to show that we grasp the core of Brechtian theatre: representing a character instead of embodying one. By using gestus, a caricature is made, which is so obviously different to the truthful Stanislavskian approach to acting. Therefore, even an audience unfamiliar with Brechtian style will be sure to recognise that this type of theatre doesn’t aim to create life on stage, but to warp it, and critique it in doing so.
 |
| Taken from google images |
We can take on this criticism by returning to the idea that gestus is made by an action that the audience can have an opinion towards, and really drill this into the performance. Therefore, if we want the audience to see the mayor (for example) as a gluttonous, money grabbing, and slightly insidious, we can give him actions like putting his hands together in a calculating manner, which characters like the slimy Mr Burns from ‘The Simpsons’ are seen doing, as well as holding an imaginary large stomach to indicate his lavish diet. So far I feel myself and the other actor playing the mayor have aimed to communicate this just through vocal decisions, but by physically embodying these choices, we would embrace Brechtian theatre even further.
 |
| Standing in the way of control - lyrics |
As a class, we were then taught a physical routine to perform as an ensemble for the opening, to the song ‘Standing in the Way of Control’ by Gossip. I think this song choice is effective in summarising our piece for the audience because it very explicitly tells the listener to ‘Fight back’ and that this can be done by ‘not giving in’, in a way that could be lost in the abstract performances to follow. The physical piece includes us taking on the role of politicians by swinging on suit jackets and bouncing to the beat with the attitude of a self assured power player; yet another place where gestus is used to inform the audience of status without speaking. This status is then contrasted by us pushing each other out of the way in order to be the one standing at the front of the line, showing the cut throat world we live in today, reminiscent of the phrase ‘dog eat dog’. Then, we progress to grouping into a clump, hemmed in by the linked arms of people on the outside of it, and breaking out one by one by pushing through these chains to highlight the importance of how one person can start a chain reaction by simply striving for freedom. In turn the audience are shown their own power as an individual, and their ability to -with perseverance- create a ripple effect.
We finish the opening by sitting on benches that mimic the House of Commons set up, and deliver a script that discusses the affect that not being able to have a say in the EU referendum had on us as a generation. We deliver this by interjecting like babbling politicians, and the whole speech indicates that although we may not be trusted with decisions that affect us directly, we will use all the tools we have to show that we know what is happening in the world, and will fight to change it. Hopefully, as our audience is a group of adults, we will challenge their perceptions of the younger generation. By showcasing a series of political plays that have received no adult supervision or input in the making, we can show that our voices are clear, informed, and passionate, as well as the fact that we are skilled enough to take on the techniques of an historic theatre practitioner. Therefore, even before our opening finishes, the older generations may become more aware of how their ability to vote and make legal change affects us, as we inherit the earth they endorse.
 |
| The Debating Chamber Script |
 |
| Page 2 of the Debating Chamber script |
No comments:
Post a Comment