Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Vaudeville Rehearsal Day 8 - Lally plumbs the "Magical Depths"
SCOOP!! I'VE JUST RECEIVED SOME STOLEN AUDIO IN WHICH SET DESIGNER JONATHON AND DIRECTOR CHRIS TALK ABOUT SETTING UP THE TOP SECRET 'MUDDY MAGIC.' Sure, the quality may be poor, the recording incomplete, the voices difficult to make out, the context obscure...
The rehearsing is well into the second act now. Last week Chris indicated that he wanted to finish a first pass at the whole play by the end of the second week. It's hard to tell whether we will get that far, but you never know. Chris's target of getting through the first act in Week One seemed ambitious, but things were pretty much to schedule.
Speaking of schedules let's do some quick calculations;
A 4 week rehearsal period is standard – that's 160 rehearsal hours.
With a performance time of around 2 hours that's a rough calculation of around 80 minutes of rehearsal for every minute of theatre.
Is this a reasonable amount of time?
Here are some things to consider;-
This time includes warm-ups, reads, theatrical exploration or exercises associated with each moment, design presentations, discussions, vocal and physical detailing, 'setting' to get in and out of running a scene, 'running' to performance readiness, scenes or moments that are worked on and later cut, and everything else the director needs to do on the rehearsal room floor.
Given all that, is 80 minutes of preparation enough for each minute of theatre? Does it depend on the play? Perhaps, perhaps not? Does it makes sense that there's a 'standard' at all? What do you think? I've set up a voting box over on the right. Tell us whether you think 80 minutes preparation for each minute of theatre is enough, not enough, or too much.
Back to the rehearsal.
Compared to the first act the second act contains a higher number of intimate moments. The scenes typically have fewer characters, as might be expected. The style of rehearsing has changed. There are fewer people in the room. It is quieter, and the confidence has risen to work towards more delicate moments. Chris works much more closely to the actors now, in spatial terms. Instead of placing himself always in the 'audience' position and talking from there, he spends much more time inside the playing space. The blocks of action they work in get smaller and smaller. They work very closely on slight moves, eye direction, tone in single words. The vulnerability in the creative process is higher in these intimate moments, as it is in performance. A joke that doesn't get a laugh is embarrassing but can be quickly forgotten. Moments of vulnerability that don't quite work, however, are much more disappointing because these moments are usually so much closer to the 'heart' of the artwork.
As I watch it feels to me that this 'close-in' directing can't be taught. It's about so many of the subtle conditions; instinct, trust, the invisible threads between actor and actor, between actor and director.
I promised I'd get back to Lally to find out how she went with continuing to develop the second act. I started by asking her whether her strategy for the play's continued development had gone to plan. Relieved, she said it basically had done. She was happy with the 're-fleshing' of characters, and Chris had made some suggestions to add some further 'flesh' too. In the process of looking at earlier scripts she had come across some 'floating scenes' that had never made it into the script. They were scenes that she had written quickly one day with nothing particular in mind. These 'floating scenes' had provided some wonderful additions. Lally commented that sometimes it is these kinds of scenes that often end up containing some of her best writing.
Another interesting thing she said was that she had discovered that the play required more 'magical depth.' She had worked hard over the weekend toward generating more of this 'magical depth' in the play. I'll leave you to wonder what 'magical depth' is until I get some more time with Lally later on.
Tomorrow I've a special for you; Jessica from Murrumbeena has sent in a question for Lally Katz. I've video-ed Lally's response and I'll put it up tomorrow!
One word for the day Stephen – trick
On word for the day Richard – sumptuous
Labels:
dramaturgy,
Lally,
playwrighting,
set design,
vaudeville,
week 2
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A question not directly related to this post but to the intriguing image to the right.
ReplyDeleteWhat's Zam-Buck and where on earth do you rub it in?!