Post #11

        I definitely think that a feeling for the uncanny is a valuable sensibility for an artist to develop. It’s important for artists to be aware of what “the uncanny” does to an audience. Personally, I enjoy when something onstage bothers me a little bit, and I like to analyze why. In Frankenstein when the creature came to life I was both nervous and a little uncomfortable, because of how well the actor portrayed the monster. The entire time he was onstage I was one hundred percent zoned in to his actions, because I was slightly nervous about his unpredictable nature. The monster is a purposeful use of "the uncanny" because it has the audience wondering about the creature and what he is capable of. It is unsettling seeing this thing onstage that suggests humanity, but isn't a naturalistic human form. I think “the uncanny” can be used as a tool to help audiences really tune in to the action onstage. When people are completely comfortable with what they are watching, it gets easier to tune out. If the material of what is being watched is strange, off the beaten path or “uncanny” than oftentimes audiences are more engaged, and want to keep the conversation going after they leave the show. Like the robots we studied in class, despite the fact that we may feel uncomfortable looking at them, there is also a part of us that is intrigued by something that is eerie and out of the norm. 

Post #10

        I think that keeping issues addressed through theatre relevant is what will primarily help to initiate change. One of the reasons people are often cynical about a performance they see is because they don’t understand it’s reasoning. If a piece of art seems completely random, an audience will not connect to it. There has to by a WHY in every performance so that individuals can understand why the director wanted to share the piece in the first place. Plays are constantly being written and produced, and I think continuing to put relevant themes within pieces of dramatic text is a way to make sure that it will continue to change people.

I don’t think it is a matter of theatre definitely being the answer or not, but a matter of using it as a vehicle for change no matter what tragic events may occur. There are many ways to invoke a change from working to alter legislation to gaining support from the people, but I think theatre will always be a way to appeal to the crowd of people that look for solace in the arts. I personally do not think it will ever be the answer on its own, but I don’t every think it will become something that is completely obscure because all individuals crave human connections with other individuals on a basic level. That is why theatre makes people listen, because it is direct person-to-person contact rather than a medium such as television that relegates these connections to technology. 

Prompt #8

         Time and pace reinforces the reality effect of durationals, because these two elements are what help to define a durational. A durational is a piece of theatre taking up a longer period of time than most conventional performances. In one of the durational pieces we focused on, Quizoola time helps to reinforce the reality effect because as the show progresses on, the questions often get more personal or deeper. The show is unscripted, and because it lasts so long the reality effect is more poignant because the audience members see the journey that these two actors go on. This is a completely organic journey, because of the natural, non-predetermined responses from the actors. As the play continues on, the two actors get even more comfortable with the questioning. This could not happen if it weren’t for the length of the performance.

I think the piece we studied in class, Marina Abromavic’s House with the Ocean View, is a creation that I personally think embodies living in the now. By stripping herself of all extraneous items, she allowed herself to be fully present. Although this is a very extremist way to show the “right here, right now” I loved the ideas that this piece brought up. Living with yourself, with others, and letting it be enough just to exist, rather than occupying your time with the myriad of tasks that we feel the “need” to accomplish every day. Although it blurs the line of theatre, art and performance art, I feel as though it shows one of the most core values of what I believe theatre should be, and that is human connection. I believe it is important to remember why we want to connect via theatre, and that it is in an opportunity to be completely focused on one specific moment in time, whether that is from an audience’s perspective or from the actor’s perspective. I love theatre that is simplistic in form, and that is something that I believe will help theatre practitioners to achieve living in the present.

http://vimeo.com/72468884

Prompt #7

A theatrical production that I would love to stage in a Found Space would be Seascape with Sharks and Dancer. In Asheville, NC there are lots of bookstore/coffee shop spaces with shelves and shelves of books, magazines, newspapers etc. I think that this would be an interesting environment to stage this show, because originally, it calls for being in Ben’s house. Ben is a writer who works in a library so it’d be an interesting adjustment putting it into a bookstore/coffeeshop. It’d be interesting to put two actors in this space after working on the show, and just see what they do with the environment. The coffee shop that I’m thinking of specifically has different levels, balconies and ladders, and would give them a unique environment to explore.

I think in this case the framework of a site-specific theatrical production would be an enhancement for both the audience and the performer. It’d give the actors freedom, and allow them to completely go with their impulses rather than sticking to movements that were one-hundred percent pre-determined. The audience would enjoy this added aspect of spontaneity. Considering that the action of the story is also quite energetic and spontaneous, I believe that putting it in a found space similar to the original set desire would create a very interesting dynamic.

I think there is some truth to Kantor’s view, but I do not completely agree with it.  Although it is true that drama materializes organically in day-to-day life, I do not think that theatre has been completely neutralized. If that was the case, humans as a society would not be drawn to it at all. Regardless of the fact that we go through a rehearsal process to put on a show, when the run of the show starts, there is still an aspect of unpredictability to the show. A show can take on an emotional, unpredictable life of it’s own once an audience is added, and I don’t think there is anything neutral about that. One of the reasons that I love going to see theatre performances is to watch people make new discoveries and new connections that they may have not ever realized before. Drama is still materialized through theatre because the actors, as people, change every minute of every day. No person is the same two-days in a row, and so therefore every show will be different. I believe it’s about being able to recognize that a show takes on a life of it’s own, as a result of the actors being individuals that are on a constant journey. 

Prompt #6

With the development of other artistic mediums including technology, there may be a “danger” of losing theatre as an artistic expression. However, I do not think we ever will. There are so many reasons that traditional theatre has stuck around for as long as it has. For example, many theatre practitioners are familiar with the work of Shakespeare. His work appeals to such a large variety of people, audience members and artists alike, so it still creates human connections when it is performed. Audiences enjoy taking part in the tradition that is, “a night at the theatre.” Experientially, film is a very different experience. You walk into the theatre, sit down, watch the film, and leave. In theatre, there is the experience of interacting with those around you and the actors onstage during the viewing process. Nothing technological will every completely replace humans, in one room, connecting over the art that is occurring onstage. Although film creates the ability to view from different perspectives, people are often much more fulfilled absorbing each other’s energies in a room, which is why theatre will stay strong.

In this technological era, it is nearly impossible to experience current events or personal happenings without the influence of the media, specifically social media. One example of this is the announcement that Highland Coffees was slated to close. I was on facebook on my phone, mindlessly scrolling, when I noticed a headline one of my friends had shared. The article was companied with a raging rant against Hank Saurage, the property manager. In addition to being sad about my favorite coffee shop’s potential end, I was also automatically extremely angry by virtue of the fact that my friend who posted it was extremely angry. On the one hand, it was a very impersonal way to find out about something so personal. On the other hand, media actually benefitted the situation because the people of Baton Rouge were given time to stand up and fight for something that holds a special place in their hearts. The problem is that media takes issues that are very emotional or intense, and makes them impersonal. Art and theatre are making the effort to bring back the emotion and intensity. Part of the reason that I love going to shows or art galleries so much is because of how in tune with my emotions it makes me feel. The growing of technology and media pushes people towards art forms, because it causes them to have to search for some truthful human connection/emotion.

Prompt #5

     A theatrical abstraction that struck me as effective would be in Five Flights, when the production team decided not to physically put an aviary on stage. The entire story is centered around this immense, beautiful yet broken down aviary. However, this aviary wasn’t explicitly built onto the set. Sofer’s theory of “dark matter” helps elucidate the effectiveness of this choice because as he says, this “dark matter” is an extremely pertinent part of the play. The aviary is what causes the conflict of the story, because the family cannot decide who to give it to or what to do with it. One of the reasons it is so effective, is that it leaves the actual look of the aviary up to the audiences’ imagination. By doing that, I think the audience is drawn in more. Based on the descriptions given throughout the script, each individual watching the show is able to conjure what the aviary looks like and represents to them. Each person’s interpretation is unique. The idea of the aviary is more mysterious, more intriguing and instills the audience members with a sense of curiosity and wonder.

    The best way for the Holocaust to be represented is historically and factually. I don’t think there is anyway for the Holocaust to be represented in a completely unbiased manner, because even if it is shown in what is supposed to be a “purely historical way” there is still someone who put together that documentary, or arranged those photographs from the Holocaust. For example, the Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C. was created to memorialize this event and educate individuals about it. Although it is filled with historically accurate information, the exhibits were still created by someone, and this individual made it so attendees of the museum view things in a certain order or way. Despite that bias, I still think this is the best way represent the Holocaust.

    There are plenty of pieces of artwork that I’m sure beautifully depict the Holocaust in a heart-wrenching manner, however I personally don’t think it is an event that should be beautified at all. There is no way the horrors of Auschwitz can be redeemed. The most respectful way to approach the event is in a factual manner, with as little artistic interpretation placed on it as possible. Our discussion about the possibilities of abstraction is pertinent to this topic, because I believe that when the Holocaust is a topic of artistic expression, be it film, art or literature, there is a certain level of horror that isn’t completely addressed. So that individuals can watch it, there is generally a certain level of hope in these art forms and for some people during that time I don’t think there was any. By omitting the full-extent of atrocities, panic and sadness that were felt during this time, the dark-matter is created.

Prompt #4

I think that the rise and growth of physical theatre have definitely opened peoples’ minds regarding the way theatre is performed. Physical theatre was derived from several types of theatre including mime, contemporary dance and Noh. Artaud was, in fact, a huge proponent of physical theatre because he believed that this non-traditional style allowed performers to have a more direct relationship with the audience. Physical theatre breaks the convention that theatre has to involve a proscenium stage, dialogue, etc, and instead allows the audience members to personally interpret the story through movement.

It’s effective because each individual in the audience can interpret the performance in their own specific way. Conventional dialogue can set up walls, because if one doesn’t agree with the words being said, it is easy to shut off and not be opened minded towards the rest of the performance. On the other hand, because physical theatre is so open to interpretation, it can reach an extremely broad audience. More people can find a message within the performance that he or she relates to on a personal level.

I believe that we can bring theatre to our communities by making it more minimalistic. Theatre can be performed in any venue at any time, so why isn’t it? It doesn’t take a full-scale theatre, lighting design and set to create a piece of moving theatre, it takes people that are passionate and want to share a message with the world. Bringing theatre to streets, coffeehouses, museums, schools, any less-likely venue would make it more relevant. Although there is something wonderful about a fully fleshed out production on a proscenium stage, I think that 21^st century individuals crave basic connections because they don’t often receive them. Creating theatre that solely focuses on people, and the now, and human connection, is the key to bringing it to the lives of others in the 21^st century. 

Prompt #3

Several years ago, a show was done at LSU titled The Smoking Lesson. To this day, it’s one of my favorite shows. It’s a coming of age story, with themes of adolescence, wanderlust, and mental illness. It’s an extremely raw original story and all of the characters are so complex. I identified with the coming of age struggle, and the challenges that the main characters were constantly facing in terms of friendship and romantic feelings. Although I loved the show, there wasn’t one specific message that stayed with me or changed me. I didn’t have an “ah-ha” moment of sorts. So although I was extremely entertained by the production and connected to it on a personal level, it didn’t necessarily “inform” me of a specific idea.

A production that convinced me of something True, I would have to say is Dog Sees God. I loved this play from the first time I read the script to when Daniel Matthews direct it here at LSU. This show as a whole really made me reflect on the way I treat people on a day-to-day basis. You never know what has happened in someone’s day or even in his or her lifetime. Dog Sees God highlights the importance of human interaction, and how much we affect one another. I left really embracing the Truth of human relationships, and thinking about how much we can affect each other in both negative and positive ways.

I believe that documentary or “verbatim” theatre can offer new or clarified truth, whereas non-documentary theatre doesn’t necessarily offer the element of truth that nonfictional theatre retains. Although Dog Sees God really stirs the idea of the importance of human reacting, this exact story doesn’t reign true the way the events of Spill do. I do think there is some overlap, and both elements of truth are important, however there is a difference between thematic truth and physical truth of events that occur in a script. 

Comments!

• 1st Comment
• 2nd Comment-Performativity
• 3rd Comment
• 4th Comment
• 5th Comment 
• 6th Comment
• 7th Comment
• 8th Comment
• 9th Comment

Prompt #2

     Nowadays, there is a new trend where individuals wear a rosary around their neck as a piece of jewelry. This is the example I have chosen for my tweaked performative act. These people get dressed, and when accessorizing decide they will wear a rosary around their neck because they believe it appears "cool" "edgy" etc. What they are intending is self-expression. This looks a certain way, and so I want to wear it. What they do not realize is that they are actually using a religious symbol. The rosary is a strand of beads that is used in contemplative prayer to venerate Mary. The beads provide a physical way of keeping track of the prayers, so that an individual can fully focus on the words they are saying. Rosaries are meant to encourage prayer, the Code of Canon law says "Sacred objects, which are designated for divine worship by dedicating or blessing, are to be treated reverently and are not to be employed for profane or inappropriate use even if they are owned by private persons." (1171)  To not be aware of the sacred nature of the rosary takes away from its meaning.

     So, although I believe there are many people who are aware of what their accessories affiliate them with, I also think that many, many young people with rosaries slug around their necks don't understand how they are projecting themselves. They are trying to stay "relevant" but in fact are decorating themselves with a method of prayer that is hundreds of years old. The Catholic version of the rosary, which grouped the mysteries into three sets, was established in the 16th century by Pope Pius  V. However, prayer beads have been used by many religions including Buddhism,  Islam and the Bahai Faith. The earliest usage traces to Hindu prayers in India. So while one may be donning the rosary as a hip or trendy piece of jewelry, he or she is actually referencing an ancient tradition.

Prompt #1

One idea that was particularly eye-opening to me from Carlson’s piece was the idea of a performer’s consciousness dictating whether or not they were performing. When discussing the question, “What is performance?” during class, many individuals said that they considered almost every moment of living/being a performance. I didn’t necessarily agree with that, because I don’t consider myself performing when I’m in class or hanging with friends or family. Although onstage one is supposed to place his or her self fully in the moment, I do think it is true that on a certain level one is conscious of the fact that they are on a stage performing a specific piece in front of an audience, rather than just going about their normal tasks in day-to-day life. I was very glad that Carlson gave credence to the idea that one must be aware of the fact that they are performing in order to perform.

This is important to me because it allows me to distinguish my time onstage from the way I behave in everyday life. I’m not attending a university in order to discover how to do my dishes or speak appropriately to a professor during class, but to master my craft-acting. By identifying this difference, I can allow my time as a theatre performance major to wholly help myself improve as a performer, rather than saying that I go to school just to help me function as a human being.

One instance of “performance” that stretches the definition as we know it are the street performers in New Orleans that stay completely still, with only the occasional robotic movement. We often consider performance to be this elaborate show, on a stage with an large audience, however these men and women pride themselves on keeping themselves completely still so that they look like statues. I think that they are definitely conscious that they are performing in front of people because they are often performing in the street to get money, but I would definitely say it’s a controversial performance because these performers most likely have not gone to school for years to develop their craft. Carlson says that one of the things that makes an individual a performer is their skill set, and although it may be a challenge to do what these performers do, I don’t see it as a skill set that they have taken a whole lot of time to develop. It challenges our belief because instead of participating in an elaborate performance, they are merely intriguing passerby by standing completely still.

…here is an example of a street statue in Nola. Although he is conscious that he is performing, he hasn’t worked to develop the skill set that makes one an actor/performer. So in some instance Carlson would say he is performing, but his performance could also be looked at as controversial.

http://www.redbubble.com/people/sandiegomilt/works/4952344-living-statue-guarding-bourbon-street-new-orleans