Goodbye Vaudeville Charlie Mudd blog

This is the blog of the creative process of Arena Theatre Company and Malthouse Theatre's co-production of 'Goodbye Vaudeville Charlie Mudd.'

The show closed on March 28th '09, and there won't be any more entries published. However, the comments sections after each entry will be open for a time in case you want to make comments or ask questions. You can also contact Arena Theatre Company (there is a link to our home page on the right).

This blog followed the creative process throughout the rehearsal process and the premiere season. You will find an archive on the right hand side, and there is an extensive labeling set up to allow you to easily navigate to places that are of most interest to you. We hope it is of interest to theatre goers and theatre makers alike!

Arena Theatre Company.

Vaudeville closes at The Malthouse

Goodbye Vaudeville Charlie Mudd had its final performance of its premiere season last Saturday night. The final show was a really good one. It’s always good to finish a season with a show that everybody feels good about. In companies of artists that work together often the end of one show is not usually a point of exceptional significance. More often than not the next rehearsal or workshop is scheduled into the not too distant future.

When a group is assembled for a specific project, the final performance naturally holds more significance for everybody. The professional theatre in Australia mostly works in the latter model. It is predominately independent theatre companies that work in the former.

The last question I was going to look at in the process of building a work of theatre is how the play developed and evolved throughout the season. I attended the play in each of the weeks that it played to try to get some kind of a sense for this. The thing that perhaps struck me most is just what a complicated question this really is.

For plays in which the artists are highly skilled and experienced, the performances night to night vary incredibly subtly. It seems an obvious thing to say, but at an experiential level it is the audience reaction that seems to vary considerably night on night, while the performance doesn’t change much at all.

Also, it seems to me that perhaps a person needs to go along nightly to fully understand whether subtle changes they see are part of a trend in the development of the performance, or just a subtle shift in a single show.

For me, the most obvious development in the show was the performers’ continued ability to work in finer and finer detail. The responses and offers to each other within the world of the play were getting more and more sophisticated as they were able to live inside it every night. This is particularly clear in the moments when the performers aren’t the centre of focus in a scene; these moments would begin to fill with all kinds of thoughts and moments related to the character and moment that enriched the world of the play.

I spoke to Chris to get his thoughts on how the play developed through the run. Firstly, Chris attended the show through all the previews and first two nights. After that he attended 2 shows a week for the rest of the run. For the shows he didn’t attend he relied on the detailed show reports given by the Stage Manager for how the show was progressing.

His feeling is that the show got better and better through the season. Having said that, Lally reported that two of the early shows she had attended but Chris hadn’t conveyed a heightened feeling of ‘magic.’ They were in agreement that a later show they attended together did not quite create as magical a feeling. So, he thinks it was not necessarily a linear progression.

Chris personally really enjoyed the final performance. Partly this is because of the improvement in the show, but also because he felt that he was in a similar position to any other audience member. With no more shows to do, his responsibility to give notes or work to keep improving the show had ended and he could just watch like everybody else.

One thing that became apparent to Chris through the season was that the second act had a particular running time that worked best for the play. The best shows consistently had a second act running time of 70 minutes.

There were occasions that the second act would get down to 67 minutes. This was too fast. It indicated to Chris that the important change in rhythm that was supposed to happen toward the end of the second act wasn’t happening as it should have been. At this level of practice, 2 minutes worth of time is quite significant. A consistent note from Chris was to make sure that the cast took their time in the second act and didn’t rush through some of the more poignant moments and sequences.

It is a feature of work in this country that very few plays get more than a single season. This is particularly the case for works that premiere at the big theatre companies because of the resources required to remount. Somewhat ironically, it is easier to remount shows that were begun on no budget because having worked on the show for nothing to begin with, people are often happy to continue on that basis if they have faith in the project.

Should Goodbye Vaudeville Charlie Mudd get another season Chris has identified a few key things he would like to work on. Firstly, there are a number of scenes from previous drafts, or scenes that were cut during the rehearsal period, that he now knows have a place in the piece. He’d like the opportunity to work on the play again to replace some of these scenes.

Secondly, Chris talked about working on the piece’s “organising structure.” This is a really interesting concept that Chris uses in his understanding of what makes it theatrically logical for one scene to follow another. What is the larger theatrical structure that gives meaning to how scenes and moments follow one another? Chris says that the organising structure of the first act is clear and powerful; that the performers are doing their show in an empty theatre for an imaginary audience. The organising structure for the second act, however, is more complicated than that. He thinks that he would develop his understanding of the organising structure of the second act further if there was to be another mounting of the show.

The concept of “organising structure” is one that could be very useful to young theatre makers trying to build new work.

Vaudeville - Time to Talk. Part 2.

This post is a continuation from yesterday's about the Time To Talk on Tuesday night. So, if you've not read yesterday's post yet, it appears directly below this one.

Peter Clarke began the discussion by getting all of the creatives to speak about their contributions. Then he opened the forum to the audience to ask whatever questions they were interested in getting answers to.

This is an approximation of how the discussion unfolded after this point. This is mostly paraphrased; even things that are in quotations are not direct quotes.

“What from the research informed the script the most?”
Chris and Lally fielded this one; they mentioned three things. The stories told to them by Frank Van Stratten; writer, broadcaster and theatre historian. The figure of Hugh D. Mackintosh, entertainment entrepreneur of the era. A video that Chris and Lally watched in which old vaudeville entertainers talked about why vaudeville died. All the old performers had different thoughts for why it had 'died', but ultimately the sense that the pair got from watching the film was that all of these performers found it impossible to move on.

Chris then went on to talk about nostalgia, and that the deeper he researched the vaudeville world, the more he realised that many of the acts just wouldn't be well received today. He came to the understanding that it is far better that piano players in black face, comedians doing racist jokes and the like, are better off left behind. Nostalgia can give these acts a sheen of romantic allure, but this is likely at the expense of seeing these acts for what they really were, and at the expense of allowing artists to move on.


“You've set the play in 1914. Would you have a ventriloquist as raunchy as that in 1914?”
Good question. The answer to this question came from a few different people. It's an interesting and complex question. The first answer was that perhaps you wouldn't find an act as raunchy as this in 1914. However, in the context of the piece, this show is not a typical 1914 vaudeville show. In fact, it is a dismal failure. Their acts are actually turning people away. Secondly, we don't really know how raunchy the acts of that time may have been. We do know that some of these acts were very bawdy, and quite flagrant in providing their audiences with titillation. Certainly there's no shortage of racy puns and inuendo in Shakepeare, which was three centuries prior. It might be a misunderstanding to presume that standards in today's theatres are more liberal than in the past. Having said that, Chris concedes there may be some anachronism in some of the phrases the characters use. The balance is in what serves the work as a piece of theatre for today's audiences, and what is historically correct. After all, it is an artwork first, not an historical document.

The follow up question to this one is; “Are the actors playing to an imagined audience in 1914 or the Beckett Theatre?”
Another interesting question. The cast field this question between them. The actors seemed to have differing views on this. Some discuss that they imagine that they play to a 1914 audience, others that they don't think about the audience because there is not supposed to be one in the first act, still others say that it is impossible to play to anybody BUT the audience that is in the theatre at the time; anything else might sound clever, but it is actually not possible to play.

“How much input did the actors have into the construction of the show?”
Lally says that on this piece she and Chris were determined they would have a 'finished' script that wouldn't change much over the rehearsal period. However, as regular readers of the blog will know, the script was still being worked on right through the rehearsal period and cuts were being made through the preview period. Chris says that while the cast had no specific role in developing the script, their instincts for what was working and what was not was invaluable to the process.

Finally, Peter asked Chris and Lally for any final comments or reflections they had. Lally reflected that she's really happy for the show to be in the hands of the actors now. She was so frantic in the lead-up, that it's real relief that the cast now owns the show. Chris said that he has just begun to watch the show as a spectator rather than a director, but it will not be until next week that he could really enjoy the show.

The forum was well attended, and was a relatively long one; a reflection of how interesting the show is, and also a reflection of the fascination that comes with experiencing how Chris has managed to successfully weave so many extraordinary elements and layers into the piece.

Once again, our thanks to Peter Clarke. If YOU have any questions for any of the team don't hesitate to send them in and I'll see if I can get an answer for you!

Vaudeville - Time To Talk. Part 1.

The show returns to the stage after having a night off. Everybody has been telling me that the show has been getting better and better, so I'm excited to see it again after missing a couple of nights.

The first Tuesday in a season at the Malthouse is “Time To Talk” night. Peter Clarke hosts the session, which is a forum where audiences have the opportunity to speak to the creatives and performers about the show. Thanks must go to Peter for facilitating the discussion; he is so informed about theatre and is such an accomplished communicator that I couldn't imagine anybody doing a better job.

I made some notes on the forum. Some of what came up we have covered already in the blog, but there was plenty of new stuff too. Of course, it's also interesting to hear what questions people have about the show. Because of the sheer volume I’ve decided to break it up into 2 separate posts.

Peter opened up the forum by asking Chris and Lally about the relationship between research and theatre, and what the genesis of the piece was.

As we know, nearly 4 years ago Chris discovered a book called “Act as Known” by Valentyne Napier in a Brunswick Street book shop. Napier’s parents spent their lives in vaudeville and were famous for their Spider and Butterfly act. Their lives, and the lives of the other performers and the theatres they worked in are the subject of Napier’s book. This book sparked Chris’s interest in working on a show inspired by Australian vaudeville.

Chris and Lally then successfully applied for a residency at the State Library of Victoria to research Australian vaudeville acts. The pair were especially interested in the forgotten people of history; the ones who are not celebrated by history. Rather, the ones that fell through the cracks, and can only be found in small newspaper articles or pieces of ephemera.

Lally's research was more hap-hazard. She would get stuck musing on a particular article, or find herself reading unrelated advertisements. Chris was more methodical and would drive Lally towards articles and information of note.

One particular theme that came up a lot in their research was how often drownings in the Yarra River would be reported on. The river gained a monstrous persona that would rise up to absorb people into itself; drowning them and burying them in mud.

They also mentioned the influence on the work of entertainment entrepreneur Harry Rickards. (There's a link to his bio on the right.)

One of the audience members asked how the actors dealt with the form and style of the piece, given the different styles of the two acts, and the quite specific requirements of vaudeville?

Matt responded by saying that for him it was quite a natural extension from the direct style of presentation that is used in circus.

Christen said that her greatest concern was in the ventriloquism. It's a highly skilled art form in its own right, and although she was continually told that her character was not a good ventriloquist, performing something badly is not necessarily any easier than performing it well. She went on to say that the two acts provide two distinct challenges. The first act requires immersion in the world of vaudeville. The second act requires what Christen called 'capital M Magic'- big emotion, big moments, bold commitment. Addressing these two different approaches in a single show was a big challenge.

Julia talked about understanding the world of the piece, and how it only crystalised for her once she was playing on the set and working in the costumes. These things were crucial in her development of the character.

Alex responded that he saw it quite simply; he tries to do what the director tells him to do.

Jim said he had a couple of ways in. One of which was the voice of John Meillon's character in The Picture Show Man.

The discussion moved on to design. Jonathon was roundly applauded for his work on the costume and set. As was Richard, for his lighting.

Richard revealed the way he had approached the contrast between the two acts in respect of the lighting design. He said that the first act was defined to a large degree by the footlights, a traditional feature of the old theatres. Footlights tend to flatten a space, and this became the primary feature of the design. But, in the second act he was working to make the performers and the space more three dimensional. He also wanted to give the performers the impression of being ghosts, that would at times feel as though they were floating in the space.

More from the Time To Talk tomorrow! I've moved the Countdown clock to when the show ends, so if you've not seen it yet get down to the Malthouse. It will close faster than you think!

Vaudeville - The work's not over with the Opening...

We'd welcome any feedback on the show. Shoot us a comment if you feel inclined!!

The Opening Night was roundly considered to be a great success. The energy was strong and the cast put up a really first rate performance. The woman I was sitting next to absolutely adored the show; she laughed her head off, screamed for real during the knife throwing and sighed in the all the right places. At the end of it she applauded with great enthusiasm.

But the Opening Night is not the end of the journey of the show. As mentioned previously, Chris is very aware of the show's development across the journey of the season, and beyond. The show does not suddenly become exactly the same show every single night after it opens. This is particularly the case with a new play. I caught up with Lally and Chris to ask them how they thought the show was progressing:

Being Monday; the play has had 4 runs since I last saw it. Lally, on the other hand, has been to every performance bar one. Her sense is that the play is still developing a solid sense of itself. The actors are doing great work, but she thinks that it will be the end of this week or the beginning of next week before the play matures to a point that brings the work a consistency night on night.

I ask Lally what it is that she thinks is still developing in the work. She says she feels the world of the play is still being filled out, and that there are greater layers of intricacy in the performances every night.

I ask her whether she reads reviews, and what sort of effects they have on her. She tells me that she can't help but read all the reviews as they are released. She sees the reading of reviews as part of the experience of theatre, which can brings either relief or heart break. She can take poor reviews pretty hard.

I ask Chris what he is looking for now when he watches the show after opening night. He says that there are certain 'keys' to the dramatic experience of the play that need to be there night after night for the play to work. At this stage in the process he sees his role as making sure those 'keys' stay in tact. He makes notes for the actors to remind and prompt them to maintain their focus on these keys, and encourage them to keep them working in the way he expects them to. He also looks for when the actors seem to be getting too confident or 'comfortable' in important moments. This can lead to a moment losing its excitement or 'live-ness.'

But it is not all maintenance. Chris makes the point that there are developments in the relationships between the characters, as well as between the cast and tech crew that enrich the show as it runs. There are moments that the audience's reaction validates for the performers and helps them to build their understanding of their role.

On the other hand, there are ways that an audience might respond to a performance that encourages it to develop in a way that works well for a particular scene, but does not serve the play as a whole. The most obvious example of this is in humour; an actor responding to getting 'laughs' from a scene by playing to the comedy, when something slightly more serious in tone may work better overall.

Another thing Chris looks out for is the tendency to play the pace of a scene, rather than every thought. He suggests that sometimes actors can feel good in a scene because the pace of it is right, but in fact they are skipping over the detail of each individual thought. So, he has to remind them to keep the detail in mind.

Finally, he is looking out for how long term trends in the development of the piece are effecting different individual parts. A show is usually a an intricately balanced machine, and growth in one part of it effects the parts surrounding it. By way of a simple example; a fast scene might be balanced against a series of slow scenes. However, if the series of slow scenes starts to work faster, the balancing fast scene might need to be slowed down to make the entire sequence of scenes work.

I ask Chris what place Reviews have in the artistic process. Ideally he says, they part of the fabric of the existence of the show, and should facilitate and frame discussion about the work. I ask more specifically about what effect they have on the artistic process of the show itself, rather than the broad discussion or framing of the show.

He says that he makes it a practice not to discuss reviews with the cast, or to invest too much importance in them. Chris says he thinks the opinions of peers in the industry are probably far more potent, particularly for performers, than the opinions of critics. He sees the potential effects of reviews or peer opinion much the same as the effects of the audience. They can validate good developments, but also validate developments that seem useful in isolation but don't serve the whole.

Having said that, Chris sees that the influence on the process can be much more subtle than that. By example, Chris had a lot of notes to give after the second show. He felt he had many details of the kind above to relate to the actors . The reviews that were published on the Friday were all very positive, which allowed Chris to be as direct as he wanted to be in his notes. If however, the reviews had have been negative, Chris would have felt compromised in the delivery of these notes. He feels that the actors would have been less clear as to whether these notes were brought on by Chris's understanding of the show, or as a reaction to the press.

Tuesday is Q&A day at the Malthouse. I'll be going along to that to report on what the audience asks, and what the creatives have to say in reply!

Vaudeville Opening Night

It's opening night. I've caught up with a handful of the actors and asked them what was uppermost in their minds. This is what they said;

'A tech thing. There's a new thing in getting up on the balcony. It's the sort of thing you could get wrong if you're not concentrating." - Matt (paraphrased)

'Give myself plenty of time to put my pin-curls in. Takes a good 25 minutes." - Julia.

'Trying not to let it become more than just the next show.' - Mark.

I also ran into a few of the other people working on the show and asked for any thoughts they had.

'I'm very excited. Every preview has been taking a step up. I'm expectant and hopeful of it taking another special leap into opening night.' - Chris.

'Excitement' - Lally.

'I think it's gonna live tonight.' - Stephen N.

'I got locked out of my house. God, I'm glad to be here. I love everyone so much.' - Jonathon.

'I'm very happy with where it's at, and very excited.' - Richard.

Vaudeville - Previews

The preview period can be one of the most exciting periods for a new show. The show is close to being fully formed, yet it is also at a point where small changes can have very large effects on the piece.

Chris talks about the pleasure of feeling the audience's reactions to the piece. When you are intimately associated with a show your focus is on its improvement primarily. You forget the pleasures of the first readings and the first workshops. While you're in rehearsal you laugh at the jokes and delight in the offers the actors make that bring unexpected life or light to pieces of text, or silent moments. But, once you get into the final weeks, it is in improving the weaker moments that take up the biggest part of your time.

When people talk about the detail they find in the characterisation, and how they felt at certain electric moments, this can often re-invigorate these moments for the theatre-makers. They become new again through the experience they create in others.

The vibe at previews can vary significantly. Some people are there because they don't want to pay full price, some people are there because they like the unpredictability and extra 'live-ness' of previews, some are there because they have been given free tickets, some are there because it's the only night free in their schedules. It's a particular mix of people that is different from other audiences in the run. Chris addresses the audience for the first two previews to remind them that it's a preview and that work is still being done.

Indeed, every day the team works on the show before the night's preview. Chris generates a list of priorities for each rehearsal period before each show. The things he works on are broad issues in relation to the way the piece is being played. He identifies 'big picture' tweaks he wants to make to the show, then identifies all the specific moments in the piece that need detailing or shifting that will add up to generate the 'big picture' tweak that he has in mind.

It is a process of honing and refining. The discussion surrounds clarity, and what is serving the play. Now that the play is nearly fully formed, it is easier to tell what changes will serve the whole. This process engages a lot of different types of changes. Pieces of scenes are cut, lines are added to clarify moments, staging is switched to highlight something in particular. A myriad of different changes are made to shape the work towards opening night.

Some of the changes feel big, like cutting half a scene. Others feel smaller, like bringing a scene further upstage, or re-rehearsing a scene with a particular thought higher in mind. But, from a certain perspective, all of these changes are 'small' because they are all about clarifying, rather than generating anything new. However, as I said at the top, though each change might be small, their effect on the work can be highly significant.

Today's rehearsal is reasonably relaxed. The tension that accompanied the first preview has dissipated, and the company is building its confidence heading towards opening. If anything, there's a slightly weird atmosphere to the rehearsal. The cast break into unusual accents from time to time for no reason. People are murmuring refrains from the songs, odd connections are being made between lines, and people bring up random tangential references as they talk. It's not a lack of focus; when people are supposed to be 'on,' they are. It's just a slightly strange atmosphere that takes hold of the room. Perhaps it's reflective of the slightly 'no-mans land' place they are in at the moment; the play has played three times before an audience, but it hasn't opened; the routine is similar to the energy of being mid-run, yet it is still being rehearsed and modified daily. It's an 'in-between' state that most shows don't even get, seeing as most shows don't get to play four previews before they open.

Tonight's preview is the fourth and final. Tomorrow night is the opening. Somebody asked me in a comment last week whether the show would change a lot across the previews. The simple answer is that it has already changed a lot across the first three. Perhaps the more interesting question is what has changed, or how has it changed across the previews. Because no a great deal has been added. At its essence, the great majority of what has 'changed' was actually already there.

But through the bringing of aspects of the play to the fore and the pushing of other aspects back, the play is experienced differently, and yes, it is changing in important ways. I will try to get an opportunity to speak to Chris about how he understands the change in the piece in the final few days of the process. In some ways, especially when it's a new play, this feels like a separate process in itself.

Vaudeville - After dress run

The final dress run is over. There's 2 hours now before the first preview opens to the public. All the actors have gone for dinner.

No major surprises. A couple of minor problems, but nothing that's nothing out of the ordinary and Chris says the dress run is where he thought it would be going into the first preview.

I'd love to be able to talk to the actors right now for you and get their thoughts 2 hours before going in front of the public with the show for the first time.

Right now I'm sitting in the theatre and it's completely quiet, save for Jonathon continuing to work on the set. He's a workaholic and will probably be going right up till opening with touches here and there.

I'll head up to the Green Room and see how they're feeling. I can't promise they'll want to talk. I imagine they'll just be focussing all of the energy for tonight.

Vaudeville Dress rehearsal interval

VAUDEVILLE TWITTER.

"Good. Really good." - Liz

"So much nformation went in over the last 2 days, I'm not sure if all of it stuck" - Richard.

"Ditto." - Jethro.

"It's half time" - Kate.

"I don't if I'l ever get out of here. I mean the world, I've got completely drawn in to this world by the river that never was." - Stephen Armstrong.

Vaudeville - Day of the First Preview.

VAUDEVILLE TWITTER.

Time 1.15pm

I asked some of the creatives to make a quick comment on where they were at before the dress rehearsal-

"It's all going SURPRISINGLY well. I gotta see it as a whole. Very important to get the arc of the lighting design" - Richard.

"There's a lot we haven't tech-ed" - Chris.

"I'm interested in how the tricks go." - Stephen.

"No. Go away!" - Jethro.

"I'm really excited about it, but I had a nightmare we performed it in a big outdoor amphitheatre with grass and the audience started having spontaneous games of soccer, including my brother. I asked them why they didn't like it and they said they did, they were just having a little break." - Lally.

Vaudeville Rehearsal Day 23 - One day before Preview.

It's the last day before the first preview. The morning is for technical 'fix-ups,' with the actors arriving at 1.30pm again today.

The mood is relaxed. Yesterday's technical issues have mostly been worked out to everybody's satisfaction. Tomorrow's dress rehearsal will make it clear whether the solutions are working properly or not.

It has taken the entire afternoon and evening to finish the tech with the actors. Although the actors weren't performing at high energy, there have been a number of really important breakthroughs during the day. The lights, the sound, the set have all done their job in informing the actors how scenes are supposed to work in performance. You can feel pennies dropping all over the place, and connections being made that have previously been understood in an intellectual way, but not 'felt' by the actors.

Though they haven't run the play since last Tuesday, it feels as though it has come a long way during the last couple of days. The 'unknowns' have dimished significantly in the last couple of days in respect of their physical environment, and what they will experience on the stage, and that confidence is already being displayed as they 'run' scenes in the tech.

Chris says he expects tomorrow's dress rehearsal to be a bit rough. The actors will really have to conserve their energy through the dress rehearsal so they can hit the first preview with the energy it needs.

Although there is an audience tonight, previews are previews, and Chris expects the piece to develop significantly through the previews and through the season as well. The difference between previews and the season is that the cast are scheduled for rehearsal until opening night. If moments need fixing there is time to run them and work them. Once you get into performance the director has time to give notes, but no time to do any re-working of moments in a rehearsal context. This is a huge difference. There are times when notes cannot shift or reveal a moment; it can only be done in a rehearsal environment.

Further to that, a director usually wants the actors to 'own' their parts. It's part of the confidence a director wants their actors to have that allows them to grow and soar in their performance. Constant changes can sometimes undermine this confidence, depending on the actor and their relationhsip with the director. The energy the actors have once a show is in performance is for the show; this is a different kind of energy to the energy they use to explore the work in rehearsal. This can also sometimes make it difficult to shift something once a show has opened.

That's not to say that the show won't change. Chris makes the point that the show will inevitably change. The show will 'settle' and the actors will more deeply understand certain things as a product of the repetition. Also, it will change as a product of different audiences coming in to see the show each night. The actors are keenly aware of the things that work or don't work, and the show evolves in microscopic ways to this nightly dialogue. Sometimes a series of microscopic changes in a particular direction eventuate in significant changes to the show. Other times, it's a process of moments moving back and forth as different audiences respond differently, and more importantly, how the actors 'test' a moment in different ways to feel how it works best.

Tomorrow is the first dress rehearsal, and the first preview. The countdown has ticked over the zero days, and is now in the hours, minutes and seconds only. Right now the atmosphere is relaxed and confident, with a hint of expected apprehension. But we'll see whether that changes tomorrow.

Especially for Friday I'll be posting again between the dress run and the first preview, SO COME BACK FOR THAT!

Vaudeville Rehearsal Day 22 - "Heads down..."

The morning is spent continuing yesterday's lighting plot, which is followed by the sound plot. There is still more work to be done on the lighting plot, but it will have to wait until tomorrow morning.

The actors arrive at around 1.30pm and go to get into costume for tech-ing. Chris and Lally are photographed by the newspaper on stage. They stand next to the infamous 'Machine of Unhappy;' (yes, it's as crazy as it sounds, and I imagine you'll get to see it in the paper).

The moment the actors arrive on stage in costume is exciting for everybody. Mark steps out first. What a great moment; everybody feels it. Wow.

Two hours later Chris says he's already numb to it and now he's just focused on the work needed to get the show into shape. The first audience will be in on Friday night.

Tech-ing a show can be really time consuming because every lighting cue, sound cue, action with a new prop, action associated with a new piece of set, every 'trick'; virtually everything that is not 'acting' is tested and worked through to be sure that everybody has it covered.

This tech time has a classic calm before the storm feel about it. The performers are generally the ones with the higher stress levels through the rehearsal period, but in tech time the pressure is transferred to everybody else, and the actors roll through the show at a medium energy while all the technical details are worked out.

As we expected there are some tricky technical challenges, which take considerable time to sort out. As each of these technical moments take shape it fills in some of the detail that Chris has been talking about in rehearsal. He might say, “At this point the something will do this thing we're planning,” but until you actually see it and feel it in the theatre it can be hard to comprehend the full power of it.

There are other things that unfortunately don't quite work in the tech run and need to be put off until a part of it is fixed or adjusted so it can work. There aren't many of those moments in the tech run, but the trouble sometimes is in knowing when to keep trying to get something to work and when to leave it and move on.

This concern is magnified because at this stage in the process, if something is left to later, later might never arrive and the element might end up being cut all together. Providing, of course, that the technical detail doesn't define a moment so important that it can't possibly be cut. But that can actually be worse; it's annoying to cut something because it technically doesn't work, it's a nightmare when that something can't be cut because it's vital, but it somehow doesn't quite work either.

As I said, fortunately, there are only a couple of problems that were put off for the sake of 'fixing.' Probably less than might have been expected for the level of technical detail in the show. Nevertheless, everybody would prefer there were none at all.

The day ends at 10.30pm and they've got about a third of the way into the second act. There's plenty left to do, but everybody agrees that it's been going well. The actors are super keen to get through it. Every minute spent working through technical details is a minute they can't run the scenes in the show, which is what they really want right now.

Tomorrow is the clincher, because after tomorrow, anything that's not working is just not going to have time to get fixed by the first preview. Of course, the Opening isn't until next Wednesday. But the public is still the public.

COMPETITION FOR TICKETS!!

Just a reminder. I've got two tickets to the best comment of today and tomorrow. They are to Sunday afternoon's preview at 5pm. Get on it now!! Click where it says 'Comments' below. (And send it to goodbyevaudeville(at)gmail.com too, so I can email you back.)

Vaudeville Rehearsal Day 21

Vaudeville Rehearsal Day 21. (Tuesday)

Yesterday the actors had the day off. With the performance schedule beginning this week the actors will be working nights, so Monday was a rest day. That doesn't mean that no work is happening on the show. The time away from the rehearsal room gives the rest of the team time to concentrate on the technical elements.

Tuesday begins with a run of the show in the morning and then another run of the second and third acts in the afternoon. Both of these rehearsals take place in the rehearsal room; I was a little premature in calling the end of the rehearsals in the Bagging Room in the most recent post.

There's going to be a lighting plot tonight and tomorrow morning. Chris tells the cast before the afternoon session that it's going to be predominately tech time after this, so they really need to hit their performances today.

As has already been mentioned, there is a lot of technical detail in this show, so we're going to need all of the tech time available to get the technical scenes into shape.

Creating a lighting design is an interesting process for anybody who's never seen it done. The lighting designer in collaboration with the director creates a lighting plan and supervises the rigging and the focussing of the lights. (The 'rig' is where the lights are hung. The 'focus' is where the light is pointed, and the quality of the light as it can be manipulated within the lantern.)

Then there is the 'plot.' In the 'plot' the lighting designer brings up each lighting 'state' that has been designed for each scene and transition. Then the director asks for lights to be higher or lower, or lights to be added or subtracted from the state. 'Walkers' mimic the movement of the actors on stage so everybody can tell what the scene will look like.

A good relationship between the lighting designer and the director is really important through this process. In many ways it's pain-staking, detailed work. A common conversation sounds like this;

Lighting Designer - “Scene 12. Lamp number 20 at 50%, 21 at 60%, 33 at 45%, 40 at 50...”
(He says this to the lighting board operator who drives the board)
Director - “Can we have the downstage area a bit brighter?”
Lighting Designer - “Okay. Let's change 20 to 60% and 21 to 60%.”
Director - “Can we remove that shadow on the edge of that wall”
Lighting - “Yeah, can you bring up 43 to 20 and drop 21 to 35.”

This basic conversation gets repeated in a variety of ways as they massage the states into shape. On large shows cues and states can run into hundreds. (I'm not sure how many cues Richard has plotted for Vaudeville.) And there's not a great deal of time to 'test' anything. If a state feels wrong or doesn't light the area that the actors play the scene in, the time in which to change things is limited. It's not negligible, but it's limited. And with big changes that require extra lamps to be rigged and focused, sometimes a choice has to be made about which changes of this are most important because there might not be time for them all.

Chris has worked with most of the design and technical team numerous times before, and it really shows when they're doing the plot. The communication is clear, the mood is relaxed and the they move through things with a great deal of efficiency. More important than that, the atmosphere and dialogue is more creative than it is functional.

Although there's a clear order of states that the team work through, and a lot of “Lamp 20 at 60, 30 at 40” etc, the work they do in this time is not nearly as linear as it sounds. There are lots of minor changes and tweaks across many elements of the show; the set, the physical patterns, the action of the actors, the props, as well as the lights themselves. This is all happening simultaneously at the same time as they work through each of the lighting states. Ideas come across many different aspects of the show that are 'banked' to keep working on if they have the time.

It's a tremendously exciting time. As lights are brought up for each state in the show, the stage begins to live and everybody gets their first glimpses of what the show is going to look like once it hits the stage. It's absolutely tremendous. The Beckett is looking incredible.

Vaudeville Day 20 - Last day in the Bagging Room

Today is the final day of the 4 week rehearsal period. After this most of the rehearsing will be done in the theatre. Time sure flies. The poll on whether 4 weeks rehearsal is enough time gave the result that 54% thought it was too short. I might re-poll the same question next week to see whether opinions have changed over the course.

As per the pattern established over the last few days of rehearsal, today will be all about detailing important scenes. The post from Day 18 will give you an insight into how this goes if you didn't read that post.

I drop down to Wardrobe again to see how they're going. Amanda and Kate are working extraordinarily hard, and say they're on schedule, which means also working on the weekend. That's the nature of this kind of work; it's gotta be ready when it's gotta be ready.

Kate is dying some of the corsetry that Amanda was sewing up last time I was down there. Amanda tells me that making the underwear for this show has been incredibly time consuming. The amount of sewing is extreme. How extreme? Well, so far she's used 2 and a half kilometres of thread. 2 and a half kilometres of thread! (I know I'm repeating myself, but I'm trying to get my mind around it.) A handful of finished costumes hang around the studio, including Allarkini's robe, which looks pretty amazing.

She also volunteers that the actors seem more comfortable now. This is an interesting comment; of course it's the make-up and costumers who the actors unload all their worries and concerns upon. If things have calmed down for Amanda and Kate on that front, it's a good sign.

There is activity on a lot of different fronts today; everybody understands that the time available to work through issues is contracting with every minute.

Lawrence is here again today. I spend some time in the Shell Room with him, Jonathon, Darren and two of the actors [names withheld for magic security reasons]. The way Lawrence works is brilliant. His is a very technically specific craft, yet the way he chooses to employ the techniques are built purely on his imagination and connection with the show. The scene he is working with the actors on at the moment is based upon one line in the stage directions of the play. It has been Lawrence's job to understand the characters, interpret the timbre and atmosphere of the scene, and then construct how this single line is best to be realised.

The way Lawrence moves is very fluid and he is highly physically controlled. The way he directs the actors is a very carefully balanced combination of choreographic precision, with instruction on how they need to play the scene to convey what is 'real.' He is patient and generous, and as he describes how he has constructed the scene with the limitations of the actors' experience and the world of this particular show in mind, the enormous complexity of his task and the skill with which he's achieved it comes into view.

I also take some time to speak with Mark Jones, the composer and Musical Director of the show. Our conversation is far-reaching and raised some really brilliant insights into the work. I've decided to report on our conversation in two parts, because I can't possibly fit it into a single post. Also, some of what we talked about in relation to how the music works in the piece as a whole might be useful contextualised within the how the piece is shaping up for the first preview on Friday night.

Mark joined the project very early on as a musician and musical director. When he joined the project for the first development period he says there was no plot and no narrative; just a broad concept and some early character sketches.

Mark's character, Bones, the 'black faced' piano playing 'end man' existed very much in the way that he does now. Other characters have come and gone from different drafts, and others have always been in the script in some form, but have had significant evolution. The essence of the Bones character has remained quite constant from the beginning as Mark sees him.

The songs are such an important part of the piece. I ask him about the evolution of their composing. Mark says that in the first development he played existing music, but since that first development he's worked on and off on composing original songs for the show in collaboration with Chris, Lally and Maryanne.

The songs have begun from varying starting points. Some of them began with a melody that Mark created, others started from the idea for a scene in which they're central, others started with written text from Chris and/or Lally. In some ways they are still developing as verses or choruses get added and cut in accordance with how they are working in the show.

I ask Mark whether the songs are 'period' songs, and how he has dealt with that issue. His response echoes that of both the set and lighting designer. Much of the music he has written has a kind of a Rag Time feel, but it is not precisely music of the period and genre. Strictly speaking, the recordings of vaudeville artists of the time reveal simpler music, and quite a lot of talking with the piano underneath.

Mark's says his composition is definitely more musically sophisticated than the recordings of the music of the time that exists today. Like Jonathon and Richard, Mark has gone for a 'sense' of period, but has not been bound by historical 'fact' in what he's provided to the production.

The production must be resonant and interesting for today's audience. This means a 'sense' of period is better than historical accuracy in the case that the historically accurate music style does not serve the production. But the lines of what 'serves' the play and 'works' for an audience is not as clear as this statement suggests. For example, fuzziness in the period of music has been deemed okay, but last week they were researching the exact date the 'Dryzabone' coat was introduced. In the case of the coat the sense of historical accuracy that 'served' the play was understood to be far more literal.

These thresholds for accuracy clearly exist in all artistic works. Some 'facts' are considered sacred, some are considered malleable, and some just aren't considered much at all. How these lines get drawn is not always clear; partly they are decided by individual artists, partly by community 'standard,' partly on an individual basis by every audience member who accepts or rejects how these elements work within the piece.

Why it 'works' that the historical accuracy for some things can be massaged, but the accuracy for something else cannot is an interesting question. But theatre artists will say that their 'sense' that something is or isn't working in relation to its historical accuracy is very clear to them.

Chris phrase of the day; “Does anyone know where the invisible thread is?”

Vaudeville Rehearsal Day 19 - Stuntmen or daredevils?

Thursday morning. Yesterday was detailing; that means today is the run.

The scheduled beginning time for the run is 10.30. There is a whole line of chairs set up at the back of the room when everybody arrives. The mere suggestion of an audience raises the ante. They are for a group of Malthouse permanent staff that are due to attend the run. The atmosphere in the room is more formal, and Darren, the Stage Manager also takes on a suitably more formal tone.

The tension in the room is a higher today, but it's manifesting itself more in focus than in efforts to release. It's an interesting curve of rising and lowering tensions that show themselves in the final stages of a rehearsal process.

I was talking to Matt Wilson about show anxiety. I bring up a thought from one of David Mamet's books that the nervousness of performing in public IS the fundamental energy of theatre. The stakes of being humiliated or adored are extraordinarily high. Without that fear, theatre is boring. The actors need to be scared. I often find myself relating this notion to nervous performers when they think they're under-prepared. (Although I have been told that my interpretation of these comments is a bit skewed.)

Matt says that it is a similar phenomenon with stuntmen. He tells me that stuntmen need to be scared before they perform a stunt. The fear keeps them alert to potential dangers, it keeps their survival instinct intact. They need to stay completely safe because they need to be able to get up the next day and do the stunt again. It occurs to me that their recognition of the danger resonates through the performance of the stunt. If the stuntman doesn't embody the potential danger, perhaps it's not as exciting for the audience.

The daredevil though, is a different breed, he says. The daredevil isn't scared. The daredevil has no survival instinct to stop them from getting hurt. If they crash and burn it's part of the experience, the lifestyle, the reason they do it. This is also exciting for an audience, or perhaps thrilling is a more accurate word, but possibly self-destructive for the daredevil. The conversation left me wondering whether some actors are stuntmen, and others daredevils.

The stakes raised by the Malthouse company staff fires the run. It feels like several steps advanced from anything the show has been before. It's a huge release of tension, and Darren calls lunch.

But, the release of tension at the good run is shortlived; after lunch it's back into details. There's still heaps of work. Heaps of technical details, plenty of moments that will need more detailing before they're ready. What needs work is pretty crystal, and Mark tells me later that the afternoon's work feels good. Friday's run is cancelled in favour of detailing. At this stage it feels that the notion of the 'whole' is now pretty solid in everybody's performances. It's the details within scenes that is now the priority.

Tomorrow is the last day of rehearsal before production week. Lawrence is here again, and I'll catch up with Wardrobe and to see how they're getting on. Next week most of the work will be done in the theatre. It's a highly technical show. There's the ocassional sign from the cast that they're worried about just how technical the show is going to be, and whether there's enough time to master the technical details. But for now, they are going hard on mastering the scenic moments. Tick, tock, tick, tock.

Vaudeville Rehearsal Day 18

Support for being a Human Spider in the poll is pretty slight, so I've added this picture of one of the greats from old time Vaudeville to inspire you. Looks like a great act! So get on and vote.

Today it's a 'detailing' day. There is a complete schedule of scenes to run for the rest of the rehearsal period pinned up on the door. The scenes they are working on at this stage of the rehearsal are ones that have been causing issues; they're scheduled for further detailed work. To give you a sense of these rehearsals I've recorded a second-by- second breakdown of an hour in the Goodbye Vaudeville Charlie Mudd rehearsal room.

The hour is in the first half of the day. The company has just returned from a morning break, and will be working on a big group scene towards the end of Act I. Half way through this hour Carlee arrives to work on a choreographic scene close to the very beginning of the show;-

0 – 1.06 secs – Chris sets up the scene they will do, quick cast discussion of specifics and where everybody is positioned leading into it.
1.06 – 2.14 Runs the scene
2.14 – 2.45 Stops, discuss details of the final moments.
2.45 – 3.01 Run last bit of scene again.
3.01 - 7.49 Julia asks about technical details relating to the scene. Chris explains how the technical part is going to work. Following the tech explanation, they discuss how the broad pattern of movement works again. Chris works through the stakes of scene, what the important points in the scene are. Then moves to some character details that provide clarity for everybody's roles in this scene. More physical explanation, musical clarification for Mark. About to begin. Wait, another quick question that generates some more clarification for the other characters in the scene.
7.49 - 8.15 Run the last bit of the scene again.
8.15 – 8.38 Chris gives note to Alex about how he's coming in on an important line.
8.38 - 9.22 Runs the last bit again, then moving into the next bit of the scene.
9.22 - 10.35 Chris stops them. Clarity for Jim and Julia of the next bit.
10.35 - 11.29 Runs this bit again. Chris stops it.
11.29 - 12.48 Chris jumps in and clarifies the intention of the scene with Jim, then works in how this effects the other characters again. Actors do a 'dry' line run.
12.48 – 14.44 Run everything they've looked at from the same place again. Pause for a line check, without breaking the scene, begins again. Continues to run further into the scene than previously. Chris freezes the scene, then clarifies what's happening for the other characters in this specific moment. They are about to continue on without breaking...but, another question.
14.44 – 17.33 They break for real this time now, and Chris talks with Jim and Christen about their responses to the situation. There's some discussion about a line that's been proving difficult. Then they're into starting positions again.
17.33 – 17.54 Run from the same place again. Stops.
17.54 – 18.15 Quick vocal detail.
18.15 - 18.46 Run from the same place again. Stops.
18.46 – 19.00 Quick physical detail.
19.00 – 19.18 Run. Stop. Quick line check.
19.18 - 20.24 Run again, this time moving into the next part of the scene. Chris stops it when he's happy they're through that bit.
20.24 - 22.34 Chris clarifies that everything to that point is working. They move on to talk about what happens next in the sequence of scenes. Chris talks to Alex about the detail of the moment to come. Then adds Julia in.
22.34 - 23.34 Run again, starting from an earlier point to get back in.
23.34 – 23.52 Quick detail from Chris; physical and intention of scene.
23.52 - 26.20 Runs again from same spot, (Chris explains FX as they run, real time.) Runs on into the next section. Real time, Chris directs detail, with the scene continuing to run. Scene comes to its end.
26.20 - 27.21 Chris gives it the thumbs up. They're going to run everything they've looked at in the previous half hour. They discuss the set up, precisely which line to run from in the script, where they're positions are.
27.21 – 32.00 They run it all. One clarifying detail, midway, but they stay in it.
32.00 – 34.20 Stops. Chris likes it. Quick question about the overall pitching from Jim. Right? Not right? Chris thinks it's okay. They move onto the dance training. Carlee is here. They set up for the particular scene that Carlee is here to drill. Positions.
34.20 – 36.28 Into the dance sequence. Running it from the top.
36.28 – 37.31 Carlee gives notes. First few steps; good. Identifies problem spot.
37.31 – 37.59 Work through problem spot; slow speed. Stops.
37.59 - 38.42 Begins from the top again, same spot as above. Move by move, half pace. Stop
38.42 – 39.59 Carlee discusses details, and moves to work on the next bit.
39.59 – 40.21 Quick run
40.21 - 40.52 Again. Half time.
40.52 – 41.12 Carlee clarifies details.
41.12 - 41.30 Run.
41.30 – 41.50 Detail.
41.55 - 42.38 Run.
42.38 – 44.21 New bit to look at. Carlee talks the positioning. Discussion of who's looking at who to lead. A discussion of timing of the middle section.
44.21 - 44.56 Run. Carlee demonstrates and yells instructions for steps and timing.
44.56 – 47.58 Back to beginning. Discuss detail. Dry run of timing. More detail of steps and arms. Question to Mark on music at that point. Carlee re-details a previously broadly specified movement.
47.58 - 48.13 Walk it again from that point.
48.13 - 49.16 Quick question. Broad approval. Set up from beginning again.
49.16 - 50.02 Run from top. Carlee dance instructs everything again from out front.
50.02 - 51.30 Discuss positions of the final moment, and actions. They practice it. Then discusses the timing, given the little changes from the re-detailing.
51.30 – 51.40 Run
51.40 – 53.15 Discuss; Carlee wants to re-detail; it's still not quite working. They work through that.
53.15 – 53.39 Run.
53.39 - 55.27 Re-detail again. Something a bit looser; the tight choreography isn't quite right. They discuss that the movement will be driven by an energy now, rather than a tight choreography. Another question about final pose.
55.27 – 56.03 Run
56.03 - 58.49 Carlee is really happy with this final version. Chris wants to clarify the emphasised beats. Carlee asks the cast if they want to go from the top or just the last bit; they want to do the whole thing. Chris wants them to come in from a long way back, so as to cover the transitional space. Carlee and Chris clarify some further details. Chris sets them up for running the scene from the top.
58.49 - 1.08.20 Run from the beginning of the sequence.
1.08.20... ...

That's a typical hour for this time in the process. So many simultaneous questions, thoughts, ideas, stopping, starting, stopping, starting, and sometimes over and over for a single moment.
Tomorrow it's a run first thing - the exact opposite of today. What will it bring?

Vaudeville Rehearsal Day 17 - See how the whole play runs...

The day starts with magic. Obviously I'm not at liberty to divulge any of that, so I headed down and spoke to Richard Vabre, the lighting designer. We were emailed a question in the week from Ian. It reads;

"Given that lighting technologies were far less advanced in Vaudeville days than they are today, how is the time period affecting the lighting design, if at all?"

This is Richard's reply.


When I get back to the rehearsal room. Jim and Chris work on some non-speaking bits. It's a scene focused on busy-ness. Chris thumps the floor at a fast pace to emphasize the pace at which Jim needs to move. He's banging the floor so hard that I could hear him down in the foyer. There was a slight jump in the rhythm which I now realise was Chris changing hands.

At the same time Stephen takes Christen to another room to do what Christen calls “remedial comedy classes.” They've both got a great ear for comedy, and the detailing they come back with is good stuff.

Chris moves onto some of the more important scenes to the central relationships. It will be interesting over the next few days to what Chris spends the majority of his time with. Whether it reveals what scenes the director sees as at the heart of the piece?

Richard, Jethro and Jonathon are all working extremely hard at the moment. The design element on this show across all levels is tremendously well developed, and generates a huge volume of work for everybody on the design team. That reminds me that I've got to get down to Wardrobe again to see how Amanda and Kate are getting on with the costumes.

The company prepares for a run in the afternoon. They are running the entire show. This is the first serious run of the whole show beginning to end. There's a little tension in the air, but nothing like last week.

When it's over it feels to me like a 'whole' for the first time. But what does Chris say?

He thinks it's taken a big step on from Friday, especially Act Two. Act One was a little bitsy, but to be expected since they've been concentrating so much on Act Two. He talks about the action between scenes in Act One, and the upstage action. Transitions are a big job at this stage of just about any process.

He thinks that Act Two is starting to work well. He says that the scenes they haven't touched on for a time that are the weakest, which is both predicable and reassuring. He also talks about how Act Two works from state to state. Again, a transition and rhythmic thing.

There's a bit of discussion about the set. Now that it's being built in the theatre there are some realisations occurring for everybody about how the set is going to work. They talk about some of the potentials they may be able to work with once they get in the space.

It's an issue in making professional theatre that is very hard to solve; how the actors can fully inhabit their world when they often don't get to work within it properly until production week. As we saw in the video last week, the rehearsal room is well kitted out with a genuinely impressive approximation of the set. Even so, it still doesn't feel the same as the theatre, or sound like it. And there are lots of minute physical details of the environment that will be different. Often it is these details that fire the actors' imaginations, and define the world. The way the performers engage with the set is the difference between it being perceived as a 'world' or a 'backdrop.'

Maryanne watched the run again this afternoon and took some more notes. My discussion with her the other day was more wide ranging than the couple of minutes of video. What a dramaturge does can be a bit of a mysterious art at times. But, it's worth relating some more of the conversation because it's interesting relative to how work is developed by theatre companies more generally.

Maryanne mentioned that dramaturgy is often thought of as primarily script work. She sees the role quite differently. She is very much focused on the whole; the physical images, the sound, the juxtaposition of elements, the actors' interpretations of moments, the character arcs, and really everything that comprises the production.

She talks about feeling the energy of the room, understanding where the actors are at in the process, how certain people watching the rehearsal might influence the particular run. Also, the need to feel what the director and writer are going for, and contribute within that frame. She needs to provide a fresh eye and an objective eye, but place herself in the frame of what the creatives are working towards, (which is possibly not at all an objective or readily understandable place.)

Time, time, time. Yes, the run confirmed that development is tracking well. But the countdown clock up top of this blog ticks on. Is there enough rehearsal time before the play opens to audiences? Just three more days in the rehearsal room, then we're in the theatre. That's when the pressure will really start to rise!

Tomorrow, something a little different - a second-by-second run down of an hour in the Vaudeville rehearsal room. Don't miss it!!

Darren word for the day – charred
Chris one word for the day – marathon

Vaudeville Day 16 - The Set has left the workshop

The first day of the final week. And the set has left the worshop and is being built in the theatre. I'll try to sneak in and get a shot if I'm allowed:-

There's been some activity over the weekend, but not a lot of activity; a really good sign. Chris and Lally have decided to make a few cuts here and there, but the broad feeling is that the work that needs doing is predominantly on the scenes, not on the script.

It's an interesting balance for new scripts. Established scripts and 'classic' scripts have their own validation. There is an implied onus on the company to make the script work. When it is accepted that the writer has written a great script, it is expected that the script will make great theatre if the artists can make it 'live.' With new scripts there's a different balance. Text can be cut or changed basically at will. There is nothing sacred about the new script yet. The script can be 'developed' in whatever way required to serve the play, to make the play work on stage.

The challenge can be in knowing when to stand by the script, trusting that with hard work the actors will make the text work, and when to find fault with the script, and therefore cut or change it.

This is especially the case after early runs of a new play. There's no question that early runs will be rough. It is one of the great skills of a directors and dramaturgs of new plays to be able to decipher in these early runs when the 'roughness' is in the script and when it is in the performance readiness. Sometimes it can be really hard to tell.

I asked resident Malthouse Dramaturge in Residence Maryanne Lynch how she deciphered from early runs whether issues she saw were problems with the script, or problems stemming from lack of performance readiness. This is some of what she said;

And it's actually even more complicated than that. Actors are so good at getting things to work that sometimes they will make a moment or scene work that really isn't serving the play. This can encourage writers and directors to remain committed to a scene, when perhaps it interrupts the play's momentum or disrupts important 'arcs.'

Chris and the writing team have been making these calls over the weekend. For the most part they're trusting the script; after all, it has been literally years of development to this point.

So, for the company it's back to scene work again. Chris has developed a list of scenes to work on, and the cast make their way through these. Morale is really high today, as all the cast are getting closer and more comfortable with their characters. They are 'inhabiting' their characters more than before, rather than being mid-process of developing who they are. They seem freer today to work on the details of the scenes; thinking less, trusting that their offers are 'in character.'

Chris is directing like the conductor of an orchestra today. He moves into the space, eyes wide and arms outstretched, conducting the movement of the actors in the space. He winds them up, he slows them down, he controls their flow. There is great clarity in the rehearsal room now. They are consciously working on fewer simultaneous issues now because there is a 'living' base, which everybody shares and can evolve with each new direction or scenic idea. Previously, every change or new direction set off a chain of questions about how the direction would effect every other related issue. Now it is like the 'living' base accomodates and shifts for every new direction. It slots in, and the rest of the work shifts and slots into a new place quite naturally. They don't need to discuss it.

Accordingly, they are actually now able to work on more simultaneous issues. Chris is directing the secondary stage action at the same time as the primary dialogue. Before today the secondary, or incidental stage action has been only rudimentarily dealt with. For example Chris will say, “You guys will do so-and-so in the background, but we'll get to that later.” Well, “later” is now. There is headspace for both Chris and the cast to spend time on this level of action. It is incredibly important work. Now that it's there, it's already adding in a lot of detail in respect of the relationships. Some of the character issues and 'relationship' issues that they've been discussing in relation to the scripted scenes is being layered into the secondary action.

It draws my attention back to the limitations of script analysis. By its nature a script analysis will focus heavily on the dialogue, and can encourage consternation about whether certain elements of the play are being properly explored or enacted by the script. Sometimes though, vital elements of a relationship can actually be crystalised with a single, or a sequence of very short dialogue-less encounters in the incidental action. Action that occurs incidentally during another dialogue or song. It is very difficult to analyse the effect of these moments in a script analysis situation.


Tomorrow's list of scenes has already been drawn up, and there is another run tomorrow afternoon. The pattern seems well set; runs separated by focussed work on individual scenes that require detailing.

Vaudeville Rehearsal - Day 15. And then there were two (rehearsal rooms)

STOP PRESS!!
I've just been authorised to give away tickets to the show. I've decided to run a competition over the next few days, based upon posts that have been in this blog. Details tomorrow.

Also, there's a new poll. Cast your votes!!

Today's video is a question I put to Malthouse Artistic Director Michael Kantor about the body of Chris and Lally's work. He's makes some really interesting points;


Carlee is back today and dance training is on again. The mood is light, everybody is wearing 'show' shoes, and some of the cast seem to even be wearing dance specific attire. There's a lot of laughter and everybody is having fun. The group's energy is irresistible. Carlee brings a fantastic 'just do it' attitude that the cast taps into. The phrase of the session is “repetition, repetition.” The choreography is simply going to need repetition if they are going to get it perfect, and they seem to be loving the simplicity of that.

While Carlee works on different parts of the choreography in one room, Lawrence, the Magic Consultant is working in another. Chris moves between the two rooms, checking in on both and providing the necessary input for those decisions that only a director can make. Another run of the second act is scheduled for the afternoon, so there is a tight schedule of scenes and moments to work on, in readiness for that run.

The company's energy feels slightly more relaxed today. As they work there seems less urgency. I might be imagining it, but the conversations seem slower, thoughts more deeply considered. Yesterday's script analysis is present in the conversations; there is more sharing of thoughts and less logic-based discussion. As we get closer to run time a buzz builds in the room. The dramaturgs Kate and Maryanne come in to watch the second act run. Feels as though there's a bit riding on it. It would be really great to have a breakthrough run before the weekend. It would give everybody a chance to relax and restore their energy levels in preparation for what is always a big final week before entering production week.

Will the threads come together? Will it build the drive it needs?

The second act begins.

The beginning calls for big energy and Jim is right up to it. He dominates the room and sets the tone perfectly.

The scenes generally seem considerably stronger, but the 'transitions' are still very present. This is always the case with early runs. But, the particular structure of this show makes the transitions between scenes especially apparent. Given the emphasis Chris places on the rhythms of the work, this is not at all surprising.

About half way through the run it has hit a solid tempo. The energy is now being maintained from scene to scene in a way it hasn't done so before; it's developing a self-sufficiency that it didn't have previously. Scenes are starting to build their meaning and drive from scenes that come prior; sort of an obvious thing to say, but when you rehearse scenes one at a time it can be difficult to feel the energy that the previous scenes provide, even if you know intellectually what it's going to provide. There are some great moments that genuinely surprise and energise the performance, even for an audience that are not new to the show.

The run winds up right before the end of the day. No time to hear from Chris how he thought it went. No time to hear from the dramaturgs who will also provide their reflections.
Everybody agrees that they will email over the weekend.

Darren's word for the day - "So you think you can dance"

Vaudeville Day 14 - An Odyssey into Wardrobe...

Today is about script analysis. The majority of the day is spent working through the play moment by moment. Lally is leaving at the end of the week, and everybody needs to be absolutely clear on the script before we get into the final week. It became clear after yesterday's run that the company still needs some work to understand how the play is working in a nuts and bolts kind of way.

There have been quite a few small script changes over the last few days, and some minor changes in scene order. They talk through the play scene by scene, moment by moment to clarify that everybody has the same script, the same order of scenes, and a similar understanding of the journey of the play as a whole.

The discussion is focused, but engages a few different fronts, so it takes most of the day. There is a good amount of old fashioned script analysis; what does every scene do in the play, why characters say what they say when they say it. They discuss what each line and action means across the entire journey of the play. The process is long and there are occasional references to time running short, but everybody is digging in really hard.

I take the opportunity to go down and talk to wardrobe. Amanda and Kate are doing the costume build. The wardrobe section is in not in the main Malthouse building, which is probably why we haven't been down there before. Liz, seconded from VCA, takes me down there. It's kind of exciting to head down there; today's video is entitled, “My Wardrobe Odyssey.” Check it out.


Wardrobe is a really fabulous place. A large window to the left fills the room with natural light; sometimes a scarce commodity in theatre buildings. There are cool looking pieces of clothes-making equipment everywhere, those huge industrial strength fabric scissors, wigs, crazy hats, reams of material of all kinds. Jonathon is pulling a piece of ribbon out of somewhere and is asking if he can have it. And Bob Marley is playing! Amanda tells me she likes it here because they are removed from the stress that often inhabits the main theatre building. With openings and previews and closings and artists under pressure and issues of all kinds, theatre buildings house huge amounts of energy. It's what makes theatres such wonderful places, but this place does feel like a bit of a refuge.

There is a cape on the main work table, with all kinds of features being attached. It's detailed work. I ask Kate how long it will take to make; 2 days is the reply. What's more, she says, she has to make two of them.

Amanda is sewing up a corset off to the right. For somebody like me, who mostly wears clothes that have been mass made in China, it's actually pretty wonderful to see somebody sewing up a corset from scratch. Immediately, the question enters my mind of how much time all these costumes take to make. I notice that the trim on the corset is being ironed on. Nevertheless, it's a massive undertaking.

I ask them if they are on schedule. They say they are, but the appearance of the countdown on the blog was a bit frightening nonetheless. When I ask them if I could see the costumes they've made to date they point to a couple of big plastic bags full of pieces; turns out they don't completely sew things up until later on.

They tell me the build takes 2 people all of the 4 week rehearsal period to make the costumes. They generally work from about 7.30 until 6 in the evening. No doubt, there will be a lot of work to do once the show gets into production week and the actors are wearing them for the first time with performance energy.

Even though they wouldn't let me take any video, they would let me take a few snaps of a corner of the room. Maybe next time I'll be able to film their workshop for you. Tomorrow is the last day of the third week. Lawrence Leung is in the house, and I'll also be talking to Malthouse AD Michael Kantor. So don't miss tomorrow's blog. It's starting to feel close now!

PLUS – the 'Chair of Unhappy' arrives from the workshop. Now that is going to be something!

Vaudeville Rehearsal Day 13 - "Is he serious?...Are we gonna run it?..."

This video was taken at the end of the day's work. It's the rehearsal room as it is set up now. Every day more things are added. I'll try to get down and have a look at how the set building is going for tomorrow. And the costumes too. The action down there seems to be building every day!


The cast run the play up to where we're at in the morning session. The first act is really exciting; there's a lot of buzz during the break between the first and second acts. Chris says afterwards that the first act is more advanced than he was imagining it would be at this point. It definitely has its own growth momentum now. There's details and 'special bits' to add, but it feels as though it has a beating heart now, which will pump blood through its whole.

The second act is about where Chris thought it would be, which is still rough. Given that they haven't quite finished rehearsing it, it's not a surprise. Even so, there's a palpable disappointment that the partial run hasn't quite brought together some of the threads that are proving illusive.

After lunch they sit down to de-brief. The things Chris talks about most are the big arcs, and the meaning of some of the important moments. One of the things the actors ask about is what Chris sees as the climax of the act. Because of the unusual structure they are unclear which moment is the climactic moment they are driving toward. This 'drive' is all important at this stage, the cast us unclear on it. What are the hierarchy of moments? What is the shape of the characters' individual journeys? The run has offered some insight and clarity to these questions that the cast share, but there is still a way to go.

One of the continuing lines of discusion surrounds what things in the play are part of an ongoing repeated cycle, and what things are happening for the first time. Trying to tease these questions out feels a bit like de-constructing an Escher painting. Defining a single moment one way or another often only creates logical conundrums for other moments in the play. Chris carefully offers definitive answers for some of the moments, and not for others.

The de-brief has been a good one. They've answered the questions they can and it's time to zoom back in again to the small picture. After the discussion they get down to work on the moments of the second act they've not yet covered. There's a strong desire to solve single moments again. For the second time this week the final scenes of the day involve Matt's character and one other. It's coincidence, but I wonder whether there is something useful about working with a speechless character at the end of the day. The scenes are necessarily more about physical action, and naturally eschew logical discussion about the text; good scenes to do when people are tired at the end of the day.

As promised, I caught up with Christen O'Leary to ask her about her process of working with the ventriloquist dummy. Christen's 'bodied' character is Maude, and her dummy is Doris.

She tells me that she had never done any ventriloquism before, and that she's never really been that interested in it. Having spent a couple of weeks with the dummy now, she's totally in awe of ventriloquists. It's an extraordinary skill that she feels might be a little under-rated. She makes the point that there is a magician on the show to train up the cast members doing magic tricks, but nobody thought there should be any such requirement for ventriloquism. (I believe it was thought that Christen's character is not necessarily an especially good ventriloquist. Nevertheless, it's a point well made.)

I ask her what is in her mind as she performs with the dummy. She says there are two things which are both surprisingly difficult. Firstly, not showing that you're talking. (Much more difficult than it seems, especially when you have to sing.) Secondly, she is acting a second character that is fully fledged and absolutely endowed with humanity.

This is interesting because I was presuming that the 'dummy' character is primarily speaking her 'bodied' character's sub-text. So why the need to approach the dummy as an entire character in and of itself. Why not approach the role as a single character? She agrees that the dummy mostly speaks the subtext, but says that she can't play it that way. The ventriloquism doesn't work unless the dummy can respond and interact like a 'real' person. The dummy must have its own life to be theatrically interesting.

Further, she feels that Maude is in denial of Doris. Maude doesn't see Doris as her own subconscious or subtext. Doris comprises some parts of Maude that Maude can't bear to look at. Doris is Maude's survival mechanism, the denial that allows her to function. “Some things in life are horrific.” says Christen, “Sometimes our mind saves us by shutting those things down.”

Christen talks about Maude's honesty in speaking through Doris, “She's incredibly honest. She's true to all the bile, she doesn't hide the frustration, the bile, the anger. She throws it in everybody's face.” But, she insists, you can't play that. She has to play Doris like she's her own character.

I ask her about the dummy's movement; the eyes, the mouth, the body. When they rehearsed this the detail they worked on in respect of the dummy's movements and timing was absolutely precise. Christen says that it's like working on two separate, distinct, simultaneous choreographies. Even for dancers that's a difficult job.

It occurred to me that we rarely work at this level of detail with 'real' bodies, and that perhaps we should. I put this to Christen. Her reply was that, for her personally, working in that way would be hell. She already feels that she builds this level of detail into her characters naturally. To do it formally would take large amounts of time, and would probably undermine the natural process that takes place irrespective. You can rely on a good process building this level of detail and refinement without trying to tackle it directly.

I finally ask her what is the most difficult thing about the performance. She replies that it is her 'act' in the play within the play. She says that 'big comedy' is really hard for her. She doesn't like delivering the big comic lines. The “walking wound” type of character is where she feels most comfortable as a performer. Given her strong background in comedy, this came as something of a surprise. Having said that, a number a years ago she played a burn victim in a full 'burns' recovery suit; her performance in that play has stayed with me for years.