Monthly Archive for July 2009

 

Challenge #2

posted by David Amaral

Challenge: Create a short scene of surprise, which incorporates a…

surprise 1surprise 2

surprise 3surprise 4

The response to something surprising is just as important as the surprise itself.  So, in this challenge, participants will both create surprise AND will respond to one!

Here’s how this is going to work.  All participants will meet at the Building Stage by 7pm, at which time I will reveal a surprise detail.  This detail (a prop, setting, sound, text… many possibilities!) must be incorporated into each proposal creation.  Once the surprise is revealed, participants will have one hour to create a short performance that both 1) explores the idea of surprise in performance, and 2) incorporates the surprise detail.

It is not necessary for participants to have created or rehearsed anything before 7pm.  We’re playing with speed here!   We’re interested in using the immediate response to the surprise detail as our catalyst for creation.  However, if creators prefer to spend a bit more time developing, they may bring in a planned/prepared piece.  The catch here is that it MUST be malleable enough that you can spend the hour of creation time incorporating the Surprise Detail into the prepared performance.

Our goal is to explore, experiment with, and perhaps even expand our definition of “surprise.” What is a surprise?  How do you make one?  What can a theatrical surprise achieve?  What are interesting, innovative, or unusual ways to develop and achieve surprise?  Can you make a huge surprise out of something seemingly very small?

Surprise us with your surprise.

Specifics:

-Creations should be short and quick (3-8 minutes.)

-Bring/Use only what you think you need to sink your teeth into the flesh of surprise.

-If you need bodies, let us know!  We’re throwing together a ragtag gang of performers who will be assigned to the creators the evening of the presentation.

-All creators will work with the same surprise detail.

LAB: Experiment # 2

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

7pm-Surprise Detail revealed

8pm- Presentation begins; discussion follows.

Challenge #1 Results

posted by David Amaral

Our first Lab produced lots to be super excited about.  Perhaps most exciting is that we officially launched this project and, well, it worked!  Five thrillingly creative and varied proposals were presented in response to the first  CHALLENGE. There was bawdy commedia, dance theatre, a mind-bending musical monologue, and a horse head on a stick!

After the presentation, artists and guests circled up to share their thoughts on the evening.  The artists had a chance to express some of the ideas they were playing with, and explain a bit about how they made their pieces.  Audience members were then able to share what they saw, thought, and what connections they noticed between the proposals and the prompt.

From here, we’ll treat the Lab itself as an ongoing experiment.  We will  refine the way we shape our challenges and presentations with the goal of encouraging theatrical imagination.

Challenge 2 is 8/11.  Title: “SURPRISE!”  Proposals should be…

Finally, if you missed the first Lab, here’s a taste:

Proposal by Max Wirt (w/ the Rough House)

Proposal by Max Wirt (w/ the Rough House)

Proposal by Blake Montgomery and Joanie Schultz.

Proposal by Blake Montgomery and Joanie Schultz

fanlab

Proposal by Fannie Hungerford

Proposal by David Amaral (with Eddie Bennett, Daiva Bhandari, and Pamela Maurer)

Proposal by David Amaral (with Eddie Bennett, Daiva Bhandari, and Pamela Maurer)

StephenLab

Proposal by Steve Ptacek

Levels on which the piece plays

posted by Blake Montgomery

1. Fairy Tale (Perhaps the Arthur Rackham look, perhaps something else. No matter what, the baseline is that the audience must know what they’re seeing: a dwarf, dragon, giants, gold, etc. A world where the four elements battle against each other.)
2. A Political Piece (What this meant to Wagner, 1976 Bayreuth production, it is still true today, timeliness of Valhalla as a house he cannot afford. I think costume design is the place where this shows up mostly. I think it helps to support level #3. To see Wotan and Fricka as real domestic partners with actual struggles. To see Wotan and Alberich as acting from the same desires.)
3. A piece about characters and desires, actions and consequences (this very human level is the level I think the piece is performed on)
4. The symbolic, psychological level. (Alberich as Id or Wotan’s shadow self. Siegfried as fighting his way to maturity against the symbols of dreams.)
5. The Mythic. (I believe is where we arrive if we capture all four of the other levels. If we stay in one or two levels, the piece is that thing only. But if we can straddle them all, then we arrive at the level of myth and deep resonance.)

Role of Music

posted by Blake Montgomery

I’ve been thinking a lot about the music of Wagner’s Ring. While we are making a piece of theater not an opera, we are adapting the operas. What does this mean? Especially because so much of Wagner’s artistry and intellect went the leitmotifs and how they construct the score, how they serve not only to carry the story but also comment on it, foreshadow events, tell us things the characters do not say and may not even know themselves.

I’ve been working on the research in this area with Gabe McKinney who’s interning this summer. Alongside a fairly complete investigation of the text and listening to the operas on CD, we’ve found two good resources that have helped our understanding of the piece. The first is M. Owen Lee’s little book “Wagner’s Ring: Turning The Sky Round.” The fact that it is “little” is deceptive; it contains such a wide-ranging discussion of many (most?) of the important angles one can look at the work from, where they come from and how they influenced the work, including political, literary, psychological, and, of course, musical ideas. But the “little” style is essential to what makes the book helpful: while not simplistic, it doesn’t lose itself in too many specific details which bog down and obscure much of the Wagner commentaries.
On the other end of the spectrum is a CD, “Wagner: An Introduction to Der Ring Des Nibelungen.” It goes through all the major families of motives, how they are generated, where they appear, what other motives they give rise to, etc. It becomes a bit overwhelming. It is tough to get through. Partially I think due to its rather maze-like construction. You get lost and turned around in the discussion with all of its examples, special examples, embryonic forms, definitive forms, and verbal sidebars. But the experience of really working at the music, led by someone who can get at the heart of what’s going on (or at least what generations of scholars have agreed is going on), is really eye-opening. How can we not include this part of the operas in our adaptation?

So, having worked back and forth through these resources and the text itself, I am starting to get a picture of, a feel for, the production.

Music I want to include:
The Four Overtures
The Ending
Music for Entrances of Characters
Music for Action Sequences
Music for Key Motifs
Music for Magic/Transformations

In using this music, I want to hear the motifs. I want to follow how they are introduced, where they change, how they become a new idea. This will require simplifying the ideas and clarifying their use. Most likely to re-introduce an original motif before transforming it into a new piece. To show what ideas are present in these moments.
Probably also NOT to use them as underscoring. I think we’d end up with far too much music if we underscore all of the scenes. We want those to really focus on the text and action. But I think the motifs we include should be important enough to stop the action, to enter into the space and demand attention. They should take their space on stage. If they aren’t important enough to do that, then they probably don’t need to be there.

But I want to follow the musical ideas: the beginning of the world, the emergence of Nature, the Gold as part of nature, the joy in the gold, that joy turned to despair, and the enslavement that follows, the tranformation of the power of the ring into the gods’ castle Valhalla, the shadow relationship of Wotan and Alberich, all the way through the piece.

One example: I’ve been struck since I first heard the Overture to the second opera, Die Walkure, with its emotion and sense of movement. I never would have realised that it is built out of the theme representing Wotan’s Spear/Will. This theme is interrupted and opposed by its opposite. In our production, I want to convey all of this to our audience. It is essential to setting up the action of this second segment of the story in the context of Wotan’s plan and efforts. This seems an essential place to begin with Wotan himself and his spear motive, to transform this motive before our eyes (ears?), so we can follow the ideas behind the music as the frantic chase, the storm, and the house of Hunding all appear before our eyes.

It is probably clear from that last example that our treatment of these musical motifs will inform not only the music of our production but also staging and design ideas as well.

The next Lab

posted by Blake Montgomery

A date has been set. Mark your calendars: Tuesday, August 11, 2009. Stay tuned.

Challenge #1

posted by Blake Montgomery

CHALLENGE: Translate Chagall’s painting “I and the Village” into a short theatrical performance.

Chagall's painting "I and the Village"

Chagall's painting "I and the Village"

“Translate” is perhaps exactly the right word. The goal is to take what is expressed in one language (painting) and translate it into ours (live theater).

You can use the painting to inform your narrative (if you choose to create one), but the focus is not on telling the story of the painting. Rather, we are looking to translate the experience of viewing the painting. What in the painting excites you, confuses you, surprises you, makes you wonder, makes you imagine? How does the painting move and guide your focus? How does style create the mood? What is the logic of the world in the painting?

Now, translate. How can you make a theatrical expression of the same mood, structure, style, or whatever quality in the painting gets your heart thumping? How do the adjectives that describe the painting morph when they describe live theater?

Creation time should be quick. Don’t dwell. Aim to spend maybe 8 hours total conceiving and creating. Creations should end up between 3 and 10 minutes long.

The Lab

posted by Blake Montgomery

We’re excited to announce the inaugural presentation of the company’s new Laboratory Project:

Tuesday, June 23, 8pm at the Building Stage.
Entrance and parking at 412 N. Carpenter.
Admission is free.

Microscopic Image for the Laboratory Project

Microscopic Image for the Laboratory Project

The Laboratory Project intends to stimulate theatrical exploration, experimentation, and imagination. Through an ongoing series of investigations, we will promote continued inquiry and investigation into the potential of our medium.

We want to give theater artists a chance to go for it, to take a dynamic idea and run, unconstrained by the demands of a full production. Lab pieces will be created quickly, will probably have rough edges, but will lead to continued development of theatrical skills and thrillingly inventive ideas to inspire our future shows.

Here’s how the Lab works:

1) The Building Stage presents a Challenge to artists (Company members and invited guests).
2) Artists take the prompt, interpret it, and create a short piece in response.
3) We gather, (artists, community, everyone intrigued!) to share our creations, ideas, and responses.