How much is too much?

I'm struck by the commonality of how much specificificity is called for by the playwright in alot of the last few scripts. Noh, of course, take this to such an amazing extreme the set is no longer up to the author. Beckett goes so far as to allowing only certain conditions in order to be permitted to stage one of those plays. There's a little more room for individual interpretation in Mother Courage as well as Raisin and even Ibsen detail the set to a very specific degree. Do the sets become another character- as with Krapp's tape player? If so, is the play's impact and "message" diminished by reducing the set's detail? I know I said in an earlier response that we can find great liberty in limitations, but I wonder how much is too much from a playwright in this matter...

Beckett

It's interesting to read a play by Beckett after reading a Noh play. In the Noh Theatre, everything is so specific and rehearsed by tradition so that if you did a play now it would be the same as it was hundreds of years ago. The same thing can be said of Beckett. He was very particular in who did his plays and to this day through a company he controls, from the grave, the when and how of his productions. This is both comforting and unnerving as an actor. With Beckett, you know how it is supposed to be, but there is little room for interpretation or for personal touch. It is what it is. As is with the Noh. In Noh, there is no "what I felt in this scene" or "move downstage a bit." It is all precise. Every pause in Beckett, every sigh, every crazy outburst by Krapp was written in for a reason. You may not know why he holds the Bananna *shudders* in his mouth for a moment but I bet Beckett does. It is certainly interesting for the audience to wonder and to figure out for themselves, maybe that is the job of the actor as well....

beckett and repetition

Zac mentioned the repetitive nature of Beckett's plays. I was thinking about it today when we were watching Krapp's Last Tape; the actor picked up, looked at, peeled, and ate the banana twice. He did it the same way each time, even though he was eating his second banana. As we talked about in class, parts of the play like this are comic relief; however, they are also a tad scary. There's also a lot of repetition in the stage directions as well as the dialogue he has with the tape and himself. The same is true for the play Meredith was in. The versions of Play I have seen have the actors do the first part and then repeat it all over again (as opposed to breaking it up). And, today, we talked about Rockabye, in which the actress repeats herself multiple times. Its all creepy, as we discussed in class, but why is it so eerie? 

Beckett's plays are like no others. I think his repetitive use of language makes the audience really think about the words. He is really trying to say something with these plays, and having the actors repeat themselves multiple times resonates with the audience. That, along with other elements of course, is what adds to the frightening nature of the plays. Its scary to HAVE to think about the loneliness and heartbreak that Beckett covers in his scripts. We human beings have been pretty successful at blocking those parts out.

Krapp's Last Tape

The interview that wouldn't play.

Beckett

In case anyone missed it, we actually did a Beckett play "Play" in Studio earlier this semester. I finally got the videos (had to split it in two parts) uploaded to the internet and thought that you might be interested. It's not the play we're studying, I know, but Beckett writes some interesting stuff. I tell you though, this was the most stressful show I have ever performed in. I have never been nervous for a performance until this one--I broke out in hives. Just a little tid bit.

It's a little less than 17 min. all togther. It might be kind of hard to understand at times, I included a link to the script for those of you who get really pulled in. (Play Full Text)

Pt. 1


Pt. 2

When I found out the fact that the Noh plays use only one set, the same set for every play, it made me think about how the playwright's job increases. With the set already pre-planned, the playwright is obligated to make sure that the text of the play creates the visual aspects of the story being told, as well as the story itself. I think it will show the mark of a wonderful playwright who cannot rely on an elaborate scenery to tell their story, but rather let the words of the play be the focus to tell the story. It is interesting how taking one aspect of theatre, like the set, can increase the focus of the writing.

Noh Theatre

I was really excited to see that we were going to be reading/discussing a Noh play. I learned about it a few years ago in Theatre History but haven't had much to do with it since. I am intrigued by the discipline of Noh and by how long it takes to be trained to do a specific part for it. I love to watch the actors glide across the stage nearly effortlessly all while the body and head never seem to move. I remember learning that you had to begin training at a very young age and were beaten with a stick by your instructor, usally the veteran of the theatre, until you had the right kind of posture for the specific role you were playing. Everything about Noh seems so delicate and precise, which I look at as comforting as an actor. You usually tend to avoid playing "emotions" but in the Noh, an expression of emotion can be the critical point in a scene. I would love to experience more with this kind of Theatre because I don't think you can get the full effect of it unless you see it live.

Spooky Stuff

Noh Theatre-
As I watched the video and read on the Noh Theatre, I found it to be kinda eerie! Don't get me wrong I found it very, very interesting but it left me with chills. The video more than the play. I paid close attention to the smallest detail to their movements and how much discipline it must have taken. Had I not read the play I wouldv'e really been lost. The video just expounded on my knowledge of the Noh theatre and visually I see now what the actors have to do. It's been said that they all have been taught since childhood and are not even considered a real NOH theatre actor persay until they are around 40. I was not surprised that the men play all the parts, but I would have really liked to have seen how the women move as opposed to the men. Would it have been the same or would there be suttle differences. All in all, the Noh theatre is very interesting and is filled with beautiful movements and stylized dancing and siniging, which is in still spooky to me but at the same time intriguing.

Don't Say Noh to Noh Plays

I, too, was puzzled and intrigued as we watched the Noh play in class on Monday. However, this experience did remind me of these plays' connection with Zen Buddhism. It is important for us to remember that one of Buddhism's key teachings is that only through the limitation of the emotions and self-control over pleasure can one reach enlightenment. This is why many Asian Buddhist cultures have such amazing craftsmanship ability; their worship involves self-discipline-a self-discipline that will produce excellence and ultimately harmony with the universe.

Zen Buddhism also emphasizes meditation as part of religious practice, and many Buddhist rituals are intended to evoke altered states of consciousness in the participants. Maybe that is the best way to view these plays. They are not necessarily intended to be representational of actual events or characters, although that may be part of it, but they are intended to evoke a new or heightened way of perception. Western minds have a hard time grasping this idea, because we are mostly unaware of when our consciousness is altered, but even in the West, we begin to grasp such ideas through yoga and similar practices.

So, let's be open-minded about the Noh plays, because they require an open mind in order to enlighten us.

Confusion

Okay I really had no idea what was going on in this play and I'm so glad I wasn't the only one. But I don’t think it was the translation I just couldn’t get the story line. I've just one question, was the movie suppose to help clear things up? At all? Because for me if it wasn't for the subtitles and the overview by Amy I would not have been able to partially keep up. I can understand the actors wanting to symbolize important parts of the play but I never got how the princess was in a jealous frenzy, until I was told about it. First of all she was just standing there, Second even if she were walking slowly maybe a bit more gesture would have helped, just a little, she was so still. However I do think that the rhythmic walking was cool, and because the music was so repetitive it must have helped out with staying in step. Crossing the bridge was suppose to indicate distance right or was it the walking very slowly and sedately the way how?


I read Meredith's post and some of the same questions she asked I thought up myself, but the main one that kept recurring to me was what happened to the sick princess/lady Aoi? The entire play was about the princess and her jealousy, what about the person who was affected by it. Did she die? Get better, become an invalid, did she get better and try to get revenge on Rokujo? What happened to this woman, it seems like she was a driving figure in the plot considering she was the cause of the princess's jealousy.

This is my first time actually reading The Colored Museum. Before the reading, I had only seen parts of episodes of the play from the made-for-tv version. I am really moved by the beginning episode entitled, "Git on Board" simply because the playwright invites the audience to become active spectators. The play gives voice to the stories that may have been heard but not given attention to. I believe this play is timeless and makes a statement to the audience,"We are here. This is our history, and you will know it.

Alright, I know that I sound like the total dunce in the class but Aoi No Uye was so confusing to me. It was short and sweet but I when I was done I just found myself confused. I wasn't completely sure who was who and if the princess ever was cured...or if she had died and if she was the ghost. I was completely lost.

I'm curious about how much the translation is to blame for my confusion. If you all recall, I was also completely oblivious when we read The Trojan Women, which was also a translation. This seems to be a common theme with me. I'd be interested in knowing how everyone else overcomes this or if I'm the only one that is having a consistent problem.

Episodic Theatre

In reading The Colored Museum, I am forced to reconsider a preconception that I've held regarding what I consider strong theatre. I've always been a bit prejudiced (maybe the wrong term to use in discussion of this play) against episodic theatre - I don't like Spoon River, or Galileo because these plays are basically chopped up into little vignettes. I prefer one story, even if it's complicated, to a series of chopped up events.

I am, however, beginning to see the value of this type of theatre. It certainly has a long history; one might even argue that The Trojan Woman is episodic theatre. I think that this style is especially useful to the playwright trying to make an activist point. Often, when we as playwrights get into a storyline, we lose our way in regard to overall theme. In those cases, and often powerfully, the story resonates more than the point we are trying to make. If, however, we desire to use theatre as a tool for social or cultural change, it might be important to simply craft smaller scenes that offer less complication and confusion to the viewer regarding our driving point.

The Colored Museum

The colored museum, I really don't know what to say. I think it was said in class that this play is realism but I'm not so sure. Time Warps, Cooking up black people in a pot and a girl laying eggs doesn't seem realistic to me. Anyway I think that this is a very interesting play, although it's a little crazy. And since I'm doing a visual response to this it made me think just how I would direct something like this. I've never actually wanted to direct any play but the colored museum just sparked my interest. To begin with I would consider the costumes, specifically Miss Roi's and Miss Pat's. For Miss Pat I don't know exactly what kind of stewardess costume I would choose. Should I go more modern with it? My version of the play dictates that she's in a mini skirt ensemble. This seems to me like a modern type of outfit. Not one that but it has to be pink. So should I follow directions or just go my own way completely. And then there's Miss Roi. I see a lot of flamboyant colors when I think of this character. And a feather boa around his neck or something. Or perhaps I should add a whole lot of jewelry. Necklaces and such. Lots of makeup and I don't know that's as far as I can see.
Putting this thing on stage, I don't know I can see like all of the exhibits lined up upstage and as it's each ones turn the occupants can step forward and do their parts. And step back to their places once they're finished. But that leads to a problem of props. If I did it this way then there would be a minimum of objects that I would use.
This play is fun to speculate on how it should be produced; now the only question is, to follow stage directions or not to follow stage directions.

Towards the end of class on Monday, one of the questions that was posed was "Do you think the play ends where it ends or can their be another story to be told after the Younger family packs up and leaves?" Some felt that once the play is over, it is over, that the drama happens within the play, for that given time of the performance, end of story. I happened to differ on the subject. I feel that when the Younger family packed up to move, the drama would be able to continue even after the play ended. The play did not end for me because I was left thinking, "What is to happen after this family moves to this particular neighborhood, especially during the time period they live in?"I believe that plays, like this one, are meant to stir up questions and encourage people to think about the society in which they live. A Raisin in the Sun does just that, even though the Younger family was not seeking to be leaders of the civil rights movement, they, in their own way, served as examples of how advancement in one's life can be made possible, no matter what race you are.