3. What are the aspects of voice production that an actor needs to keep in mind when he acts? How does voice help in characterisation? (Read up on the works of Cicely Berry and Patsy Rodenburg for reference.)
Voice production plays an important part in acting. When an actor is acting, he needs to keep in mind, the pitch, tone, inflection, pace, pause, diction, and breath control for voice production. When these are taken notice of, then can voice production be good.
Pitch is important. It is the relative tonal level, intensity and volume. Pitch allows the bringing out of the different emotions. For example, a high pitched voice with high intensity may be used for near-hysterical moments, whereas a soft, middle pitched voice is suitable for a shy character.
For tone, it helps to denote the quality of the voice, and what expression do you want to portray. Tone gives pitch quality. For example, a high pitched voice may both be angry and meek. It all depends on the tone. If an aggressive tone is used, even if the voice is high, or low, it would still be able to portray aggressiveness.
Speech needs inflection. Inflection is something like the fluctuation passage of the voice. Without inflection, speech would sound monotonous, boring and even cause irritancy. In addition, pace and pauses must be used to make speech comprehendible. For example, a speech without pauses for full-stops, commas, or a poem without suspensive pauses would make it senseless, unable to bring the meaning out to the listeners.
Diction, also known as clarity, is the enunciation of words. This is especially important in theatre work, where the audience needs to hear the speech of the actor to know what’s happening in the story on stage.
Cecily Berry believes that an actor should refrain from speaking with tension. She also mentions the importance of having resonance. Resonance is important as it helps to create a tone of voice that is projected and pleasing to hear on-stage.
These helps in characterization as it helps the actor portray the emotions and perhaps even to differentiate two characters that an actor might be playing at the same time. For example, if an actor is taking on the role of two actors, a middle-aged dame, and a man, he/she might use a lower voice for a man, and a higher pitched and faster voice for a dame to help differentiate.
2. Is voice the most important ‘tool’ for an actor? Why or why not?
This would depend a lot on the staging, the type of theatre and the script itself. If the script requires the play to be read out only, with words, voice would definitely be the most important ‘tool’ for the actor. Whereas, if the script focuses on a visual spectacle, by relying on purely movement, then voice will logically not be an important ‘tool’ for the actor.
In most plays, however, voice would prove to be important, as there is dialogue that comes together with the plot to propel play forward. Thus, voice is important as it helps the audience know what is happening, and the tone of the voice that actors use would convey the different emotions to the audience.
Voice also proves to be an important ‘tool’ for an actor if he is able to use it appropriately. Voice is able to make alive a script, through varying tones of the different aspects of voice production.
Voice is definitely one of the important ‘tool’ for an actor, but there are also other aspects like physical that holds equal importance in theatre.
Tan Li Rong
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Monday, September 17, 2007
Use of Puppets and Multimedia
7. To what extent has modern theatre successfully incorporated puppetry and/or multimedia? Does this enhance or detract from the overall production? Use examples from local productions you have seen, if possible.
Modern theatre has, to a moderate extent, successfully incorporated puppetry and multimedia. As technology develops and people start watching movies and listening to music, and with theatre having been around so long, it is inevitable that multimedia has been made use of to make for a more interesting theatre experience. At current, I feel that sound has been very successfully incorporated, with many plays making use of music clips for scene changes and/or to set the mood, or for sound effects. This has served to enhance the production in many cases, and hardly distracts the audience from the play.
Video has also made its beginnings onto stage productions, as I have seen from the local productions Cogito by Checkpoint Theatre and A Midsummer Night’s Dream by the Singapore Repertory Theatre. In Cogito, a video of half a woman’s face represented a character in the play that existed only in virtual reality. Granted, there wasn’t much option when it came to portraying a physically nonexistent character onstage besides using a video clip; however, SRT chose only to show her eyes. Personally, I felt this detracted somewhat from the production, as due to the limited scope of the video, they felt that more eye moment was crucial to the display which on a whole I felt was entirely too abstract and didn’t quite fit with the dialogue.
In A Midsummer Night’s Dream, there were certain points in this adaptation of the play where rotating images of the character’s emotionless faces were flashed onto a screen at the front; the audience was inevitably distracted by this surreal and inexplicable display, and as this was a production on a free stage all eyes were on the screen instead of on the actors at the back. Some good use was made of the multimedia where a live video of the actors was screened from time to time that was a great aid to audience members that were too far away from the actors to catch physical details. All in all I feel that the plays I have watched that utilized video turned out to be quite a disappointment. Undoubtedly however, the inclusion of multimedia to the stage has unveiled a whole range of possibilities for theatre to explore and to evolve.
8. Construct one set design for the extract you have studied, and adapt it for two different spaces. How does your set design in each space express the overall atmosphere of this piece?
From what can be gathered from the script, the set of Ubu and the Truth Commission is fairly minimalist. Hence, I have not included any more props than what is mentioned in the script. I feel that having too many props may seem as an attempt to create a realistic scene on stage, whereas the play focuses on abstract ideas and hence should have a minimalist set design to contribute to the surrealistic mood of the play. Also, all the props should either be black or dark colours, to add to the melancholic atmosphere.
I have chosen the proscenium and thrust stages to adapt the set design to.
Thrust Stage
based on
Due to the nature of the thrust stage, the positioning of the props had to be adapted to ensure that no perspective is blocked from view. Through slight staggering of the props’ positions, the audience members on every side are able to see the other important props.
The thrust stage allows the audience to view the stage from three sides; the ‘fourth wall’ effect of the play is hence reduced and there is greater intimacy between the audience and the play. This is achieved as the set is not separated and blocked off from the audience as in the proscenium arch of a proscenium stage, and allows for a more flexible perspective of the set. There will be a soft, dark blue ambient light on the set throughout the play to add to the surreal atmosphere, and to highlight the gloomy and satirical nature of the play. Inevitably, some of this blue light will spill over into the sitting area, and as the audience finds themselves bathed in the light they will feel a greater connection and inclusion into the play and hence will be more emotionally-absorbed in the play.
Proscenium Stage
The more conventional proscenium stage is the most commonly used stage in theatre spaces. The stage is raised above the level of the first few rows of seats, aiding the visibility of the set and actors for the audience. Also, as all the seats are directly facing the stage, all audience members share the same perspective of the play and hence have the same experience, as compared to the different perspectives of the thrust stage. Furthermore, since the set is only viewable to the audience from one direction, the ‘fourth wall’ effect is very successful here as the set is separated from the audience both by levels and the proscenium arch. Hence, it is more likely for the audience members to take a more detached view of the performance, and be constantly aware that they are watching a performance.
The set has been arranged such that the most important props are brought closer to the front, and all the props have been brought forward and spread linearly to ensure that they do not block each other from view.
As the audience members are all on one side of the stage now, the actor is able to directly face the audience, as compared to thrust stage where he has to vary his attention in 3 directions. In this case, the intent of the play hence seems more directed and purposeful, which prompts the audience to look for meaning in the play.
Sources:
http://www.artec-usa.com/03_projects/performing_arts_venues/carolyn_blount_theatre/images/the_octagon_photo_01.jpg
http://www.lib.washington.edu/subject/Drama/images/proscenium.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proscenium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrust_stage
- Hui Yi
Modern theatre has, to a moderate extent, successfully incorporated puppetry and multimedia. As technology develops and people start watching movies and listening to music, and with theatre having been around so long, it is inevitable that multimedia has been made use of to make for a more interesting theatre experience. At current, I feel that sound has been very successfully incorporated, with many plays making use of music clips for scene changes and/or to set the mood, or for sound effects. This has served to enhance the production in many cases, and hardly distracts the audience from the play.
Video has also made its beginnings onto stage productions, as I have seen from the local productions Cogito by Checkpoint Theatre and A Midsummer Night’s Dream by the Singapore Repertory Theatre. In Cogito, a video of half a woman’s face represented a character in the play that existed only in virtual reality. Granted, there wasn’t much option when it came to portraying a physically nonexistent character onstage besides using a video clip; however, SRT chose only to show her eyes. Personally, I felt this detracted somewhat from the production, as due to the limited scope of the video, they felt that more eye moment was crucial to the display which on a whole I felt was entirely too abstract and didn’t quite fit with the dialogue.
In A Midsummer Night’s Dream, there were certain points in this adaptation of the play where rotating images of the character’s emotionless faces were flashed onto a screen at the front; the audience was inevitably distracted by this surreal and inexplicable display, and as this was a production on a free stage all eyes were on the screen instead of on the actors at the back. Some good use was made of the multimedia where a live video of the actors was screened from time to time that was a great aid to audience members that were too far away from the actors to catch physical details. All in all I feel that the plays I have watched that utilized video turned out to be quite a disappointment. Undoubtedly however, the inclusion of multimedia to the stage has unveiled a whole range of possibilities for theatre to explore and to evolve.
8. Construct one set design for the extract you have studied, and adapt it for two different spaces. How does your set design in each space express the overall atmosphere of this piece?
From what can be gathered from the script, the set of Ubu and the Truth Commission is fairly minimalist. Hence, I have not included any more props than what is mentioned in the script. I feel that having too many props may seem as an attempt to create a realistic scene on stage, whereas the play focuses on abstract ideas and hence should have a minimalist set design to contribute to the surrealistic mood of the play. Also, all the props should either be black or dark colours, to add to the melancholic atmosphere.
I have chosen the proscenium and thrust stages to adapt the set design to.
Thrust Stage
based on
Due to the nature of the thrust stage, the positioning of the props had to be adapted to ensure that no perspective is blocked from view. Through slight staggering of the props’ positions, the audience members on every side are able to see the other important props.
The thrust stage allows the audience to view the stage from three sides; the ‘fourth wall’ effect of the play is hence reduced and there is greater intimacy between the audience and the play. This is achieved as the set is not separated and blocked off from the audience as in the proscenium arch of a proscenium stage, and allows for a more flexible perspective of the set. There will be a soft, dark blue ambient light on the set throughout the play to add to the surreal atmosphere, and to highlight the gloomy and satirical nature of the play. Inevitably, some of this blue light will spill over into the sitting area, and as the audience finds themselves bathed in the light they will feel a greater connection and inclusion into the play and hence will be more emotionally-absorbed in the play.
Proscenium Stage
The more conventional proscenium stage is the most commonly used stage in theatre spaces. The stage is raised above the level of the first few rows of seats, aiding the visibility of the set and actors for the audience. Also, as all the seats are directly facing the stage, all audience members share the same perspective of the play and hence have the same experience, as compared to the different perspectives of the thrust stage. Furthermore, since the set is only viewable to the audience from one direction, the ‘fourth wall’ effect is very successful here as the set is separated from the audience both by levels and the proscenium arch. Hence, it is more likely for the audience members to take a more detached view of the performance, and be constantly aware that they are watching a performance.
The set has been arranged such that the most important props are brought closer to the front, and all the props have been brought forward and spread linearly to ensure that they do not block each other from view.
As the audience members are all on one side of the stage now, the actor is able to directly face the audience, as compared to thrust stage where he has to vary his attention in 3 directions. In this case, the intent of the play hence seems more directed and purposeful, which prompts the audience to look for meaning in the play.
Sources:
http://www.artec-usa.com/03_projects/performing_arts_venues/carolyn_blount_theatre/images/the_octagon_photo_01.jpg
http://www.lib.washington.edu/subject/Drama/images/proscenium.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proscenium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrust_stage
- Hui Yi
Harold Pinter, Betrayal
1. Apply the Stanislavskian 'magic if' to this extract. How does it help you to build the character of Emma or Jerry?
The Stanislavski's 'magic if' is something that asks actors to work from 'inside out'. It presents an actor with the given circumstances of the character he/she is in, and makes him ponder about what he would do in that given circumstance. Like the cliche that goes 'putting yourself in the others' shoes'. Through this, he also wants us to find our similar motivations to play on; the actor and the character.
This helps me to build either the character of Emma or Jerry as in giving similar motivations, it helps me to connect more with that particular character. In putting myself in the position of the character, and acting out the feelings I would have felt if I was put into the situation, it makes the character real to the actor, me. It also helps me define my actions to make it genuine and believable as I know what I want to portray, and I would through my actions, try to portray it.
For example, with Stanislavskian’s ‘magic of’, although you might have never been married, or had children like the character Emma, does, when you keep asking questions to yourself like ‘what would I be like when I’m married and stuck with kids and put into a situation with Emma?’. This would help you to find a motivation to play Emma, as well as portray her motivations.
2. Read up on the works of Vsevolod Meyerhold and his theory of 'biomechanics', and Stanislavski's main concepts. Which approach to acting do you find easier to adopt?
Where Stanislavski’s main concepts teaches us to work from ‘inside out’, Vsevolod’s ‘biomechanics’ is rather, something that works from the ‘outside in.’
The biomechanics, conceived by Vsevolod Emilevich, is simultaneously both a particular actor’s training and a way of an actor’s performance, whose purpose is to effect the main request made by Meyerhold on the stage. The actions and movement of the actor are what that is important. Thus, a strict structuring of the body is required, to give the form that Vsevolod talked about. This would come from the training of the body.
I would find Stanislavski’s concepts easier to follow. This would perhaps be so due to the time and place factor. Being brought up in Singapore, there are lesser chances of acquiring lessons that tone up the physical aspects according to Vsevolod Emilevich, that are specially for actors. This is so as Singapore’s arts scope is quite limited, itself not even having much local groups of actors. Also, Singapore is unlike places like China, where people are put to certain ‘special schools’ at young to train and give them the treatment to become world performers in sports such as gymnastic. For the time period— even though born in a more mordenised society, parents now still disapprove of their child pursuing ‘unstable jobs’ like acting, which makes it harder to let us get a real training of ‘biomechanics,’ nor allow us to spend more time on acting.
On a personal scale, I would find it much easier too to act with Stanislavski’s concepts too. It teaches us to use emotions from our past memories and experiences. This makes it easier because it is close to us, and we really do feel for it, making it a better show as the feelings displayed are authentic, and being personal, will be able to rile up that feeling in us.
It would, of course be the best to develop both our inner and outer aspects of an actor—in other words, is to say that we use both equally. Having the ‘best of both worlds’ would give you alternatives to your acting scope and broaden your limits.
Sources:
http://www.unet.com.mk/mian/english.html
Tan Li Rong
The Stanislavski's 'magic if' is something that asks actors to work from 'inside out'. It presents an actor with the given circumstances of the character he/she is in, and makes him ponder about what he would do in that given circumstance. Like the cliche that goes 'putting yourself in the others' shoes'. Through this, he also wants us to find our similar motivations to play on; the actor and the character.
This helps me to build either the character of Emma or Jerry as in giving similar motivations, it helps me to connect more with that particular character. In putting myself in the position of the character, and acting out the feelings I would have felt if I was put into the situation, it makes the character real to the actor, me. It also helps me define my actions to make it genuine and believable as I know what I want to portray, and I would through my actions, try to portray it.
For example, with Stanislavskian’s ‘magic of’, although you might have never been married, or had children like the character Emma, does, when you keep asking questions to yourself like ‘what would I be like when I’m married and stuck with kids and put into a situation with Emma?’. This would help you to find a motivation to play Emma, as well as portray her motivations.
2. Read up on the works of Vsevolod Meyerhold and his theory of 'biomechanics', and Stanislavski's main concepts. Which approach to acting do you find easier to adopt?
Where Stanislavski’s main concepts teaches us to work from ‘inside out’, Vsevolod’s ‘biomechanics’ is rather, something that works from the ‘outside in.’
The biomechanics, conceived by Vsevolod Emilevich, is simultaneously both a particular actor’s training and a way of an actor’s performance, whose purpose is to effect the main request made by Meyerhold on the stage. The actions and movement of the actor are what that is important. Thus, a strict structuring of the body is required, to give the form that Vsevolod talked about. This would come from the training of the body.
I would find Stanislavski’s concepts easier to follow. This would perhaps be so due to the time and place factor. Being brought up in Singapore, there are lesser chances of acquiring lessons that tone up the physical aspects according to Vsevolod Emilevich, that are specially for actors. This is so as Singapore’s arts scope is quite limited, itself not even having much local groups of actors. Also, Singapore is unlike places like China, where people are put to certain ‘special schools’ at young to train and give them the treatment to become world performers in sports such as gymnastic. For the time period— even though born in a more mordenised society, parents now still disapprove of their child pursuing ‘unstable jobs’ like acting, which makes it harder to let us get a real training of ‘biomechanics,’ nor allow us to spend more time on acting.
On a personal scale, I would find it much easier too to act with Stanislavski’s concepts too. It teaches us to use emotions from our past memories and experiences. This makes it easier because it is close to us, and we really do feel for it, making it a better show as the feelings displayed are authentic, and being personal, will be able to rile up that feeling in us.
It would, of course be the best to develop both our inner and outer aspects of an actor—in other words, is to say that we use both equally. Having the ‘best of both worlds’ would give you alternatives to your acting scope and broaden your limits.
Sources:
http://www.unet.com.mk/mian/english.html
Tan Li Rong
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Physicality, Awareness of Space
5. What inhibitions do you still have in using your body to express yourself? What are the strategies you can use to overcome this?
An inhibition I have is an inability to claim large empty spaces, such as those on stages. The sheer emptiness of the space intimidates me; hence I find my actions turn out restricted, small and unexpressive. Where this might come in handy should I play a meek character, this is unfortunately not applicable to a wide range of character personalities. The performance of the character comes across un-impactful and even uncertain at times. I believe the main problem lies in my confidence and in not having ‘released my inhibitions’ yet.
A solution to this problem would be to practice spatial awareness and to gradually get used to the space over time. I feel that an effective coping method is the ‘imaginary box’ that reduces the acting space from to a fraction of the stage space. With practice, and by slowly increasing the perimeter of the ‘box’, I could condition myself to the space over time, until I am comfortable with it.
In addition, I feel that where the script is lacking in stage directions, I am unable to appropriately attach actions to the dialogue that does not seem awkward, yet not doing anything may seem too inactive for the character. In a practical session with Ms Pink’s practical group once, I was required to play the role of Linda in Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller, only I was required to do it without dialogue at all. I found the role extremely awkward despite the guiding stage directions. Ms Pink enlighteningly pointed out that even the style of walking contributed to the character, and certain actions I did seemed like they were actions ‘for the sake of it’.
I think in this case I ought to have applied the Stanislavskian method of the ‘magic if’ and fully explored Linda’s motivations and feelings so that her actions would be purposeful and make sense in the play. Hence in this case practice is the key once again, and I hope to become adept at understanding the internalizing the character in short amount of time after reading the script.
6. Read up on the works of Rudolf Laban and Jacques Lecoq. To what extent do you think their works can help an actor to be more adept in the use of space and their own physicality as an actor?
Rudolf Laban was a dance artist and theorist; hence unsurprisingly much of his work has its grounds in dance. His most notable works include the Laban Movement Analysis and the Theory of Effort. However despite his strong dance background, his work is actually not only applicable to dance, but in fact proves to be of much value to theatre.
In his movement analysis, all forms of human movement are broken down into categories and subcategories: Body, Effort, Shape and Space. He points out the similarity in the physical action of reaching for a glass and punching something, where the effect and intention differs very much. Movement is reduced to a spiritual study that ties in with the Chinese art of Tai Chi, where controlled movements are also practiced. Laban preaches the importance of the close connection between movement and emotion, stating that dance moves may be most precise but lacking in emotion, making the performance stiff and insincere; likewise it is as easy to over-express the emotion and displaying an equal ineptitude at communication expression.
This is can easily be applied to theatre and is of much use to the actor and his physicality. Stage acting, like dance, requires a harmony between emotion and movement, and an imbalance would give the impression of an unconvincing performance. The Laban Movement Analysis breaks movement down into its most basic form, hence this makes it easy for the actor to distinguish the emotion of each different movement and employ the right ones. The actor would also pick up the skill of spatial awareness and allow him to utilize the stage space effectively and convincingly.
Where Laban’s works were concerned with the awareness of one’s movements, Jacques LeCoq focuses on how to make use of one’s movements on stage. LeCoq, an actor, mime and acting instructor, started a school that educates students on stage presence and the appropriate movements to utilize for each genre of theatre or scenario. A more holistic exploration of physical theatre is explored, where students are taught movements linked to animals, nature, sound and colours, and a variety of physical skills such as acrobatics and juggling. This seems to tie in with Meyerhold’s ‘biomechanics’ method. In equipping themselves with a wide range of physical abilities, the students acquire better understanding and control of their body as a tool of expression. On stage, the actor that has gone through rigorous training in physical theatre will be used to and hence more confident of his space, and his movements will be uninhibited and more expressive, accounting for the physical aspect of portraying a character. However, I feel that LeCoq’s methods do not directly integrate speech and emotion, hence the actor must further be able to ensure that both physical and verbal aspects of his performance complement each other.
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Laban
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laban_Movement_Analysis
http://www.movementpsy.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lecoq
http://www.europamagna.org/pageshtml/Pgtheatre/SCOUT/StageIUFM/jlecoqeng.htm
- Hui Yi
An inhibition I have is an inability to claim large empty spaces, such as those on stages. The sheer emptiness of the space intimidates me; hence I find my actions turn out restricted, small and unexpressive. Where this might come in handy should I play a meek character, this is unfortunately not applicable to a wide range of character personalities. The performance of the character comes across un-impactful and even uncertain at times. I believe the main problem lies in my confidence and in not having ‘released my inhibitions’ yet.
A solution to this problem would be to practice spatial awareness and to gradually get used to the space over time. I feel that an effective coping method is the ‘imaginary box’ that reduces the acting space from to a fraction of the stage space. With practice, and by slowly increasing the perimeter of the ‘box’, I could condition myself to the space over time, until I am comfortable with it.
In addition, I feel that where the script is lacking in stage directions, I am unable to appropriately attach actions to the dialogue that does not seem awkward, yet not doing anything may seem too inactive for the character. In a practical session with Ms Pink’s practical group once, I was required to play the role of Linda in Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller, only I was required to do it without dialogue at all. I found the role extremely awkward despite the guiding stage directions. Ms Pink enlighteningly pointed out that even the style of walking contributed to the character, and certain actions I did seemed like they were actions ‘for the sake of it’.
I think in this case I ought to have applied the Stanislavskian method of the ‘magic if’ and fully explored Linda’s motivations and feelings so that her actions would be purposeful and make sense in the play. Hence in this case practice is the key once again, and I hope to become adept at understanding the internalizing the character in short amount of time after reading the script.
6. Read up on the works of Rudolf Laban and Jacques Lecoq. To what extent do you think their works can help an actor to be more adept in the use of space and their own physicality as an actor?
Rudolf Laban was a dance artist and theorist; hence unsurprisingly much of his work has its grounds in dance. His most notable works include the Laban Movement Analysis and the Theory of Effort. However despite his strong dance background, his work is actually not only applicable to dance, but in fact proves to be of much value to theatre.
In his movement analysis, all forms of human movement are broken down into categories and subcategories: Body, Effort, Shape and Space. He points out the similarity in the physical action of reaching for a glass and punching something, where the effect and intention differs very much. Movement is reduced to a spiritual study that ties in with the Chinese art of Tai Chi, where controlled movements are also practiced. Laban preaches the importance of the close connection between movement and emotion, stating that dance moves may be most precise but lacking in emotion, making the performance stiff and insincere; likewise it is as easy to over-express the emotion and displaying an equal ineptitude at communication expression.
This is can easily be applied to theatre and is of much use to the actor and his physicality. Stage acting, like dance, requires a harmony between emotion and movement, and an imbalance would give the impression of an unconvincing performance. The Laban Movement Analysis breaks movement down into its most basic form, hence this makes it easy for the actor to distinguish the emotion of each different movement and employ the right ones. The actor would also pick up the skill of spatial awareness and allow him to utilize the stage space effectively and convincingly.
Where Laban’s works were concerned with the awareness of one’s movements, Jacques LeCoq focuses on how to make use of one’s movements on stage. LeCoq, an actor, mime and acting instructor, started a school that educates students on stage presence and the appropriate movements to utilize for each genre of theatre or scenario. A more holistic exploration of physical theatre is explored, where students are taught movements linked to animals, nature, sound and colours, and a variety of physical skills such as acrobatics and juggling. This seems to tie in with Meyerhold’s ‘biomechanics’ method. In equipping themselves with a wide range of physical abilities, the students acquire better understanding and control of their body as a tool of expression. On stage, the actor that has gone through rigorous training in physical theatre will be used to and hence more confident of his space, and his movements will be uninhibited and more expressive, accounting for the physical aspect of portraying a character. However, I feel that LeCoq’s methods do not directly integrate speech and emotion, hence the actor must further be able to ensure that both physical and verbal aspects of his performance complement each other.
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Laban
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laban_Movement_Analysis
http://www.movementpsy.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lecoq
http://www.europamagna.org/pageshtml/Pgtheatre/SCOUT/StageIUFM/jlecoqeng.htm
- Hui Yi
Vocal Use and Variety
3. What are the aspects of voice production that an actor needs to keep in mind when he acts? How does voice help in characterisation? (Read up on the works of Cicely Berry and Patsy Rodenburg for reference.)
The main things that an actor has to keep in mind are the awareness of his voice, his breathing, and his posture. The first step to for the actor to have an awareness of his own voice; he should listen and be aware while he speaks, to determine if his tone, pitch and volume is suitable for the role he is playing. Quoting Cicely Berry in her work Voice and the Actor, some actors “have an overbalance of head resonance”. This means that the sound they are producing is mainly placed in the head area, without reinforcement from the chest notes. In this case, the actor hears his voice in his head and it sounds fine to him, but to a listener the voice is thin and lacking in warmth, thus actor has also to collect feedback from a test audience. Being aware of his own voice is the key to an actor identifying problems with his voice production and hence taking steps to rectify them.
The correct breathing technique is crucial to better volume, which is important in acting if the audience is to hear any of the dialogue at all. Adequate breath is required to vibrate the vocal folds to produce voice, hence deep and controlled breathing contributes greatly to an actor’s voice. An actor that has mastered control over his breathing is also able to reach a wider vocal range, hence his tone is free and uninhibited.
Both Rodenburg and Berry preach the importance of posture in voice production, and agree that a large part of speech and projection problems lie in tensions in various parts of the body. An actor’s body is hence supposed to be relaxed, supported, and with a straight back so the rib cage is able to expand unconstrained. A bad posture would greatly affect the volume, pitch and resonance of the actor’s voice, as more often than not a hunched posture hindered the airways and the sloping inwards of the shoulders also served to compress the ribcage.
Voice helps characterization in portraying emotions, personality and thoughts. A change in the character’s emotion is also mainly picked up by the audience as a change in the tone of the voice. Due to the nature of the stage, the most accessible quality of the actors to the audience is his voice, and it is the voice that tells the story in most cases.
In She’s Dead by Paul Abelman, there is a complete lack of stage directions, and even character names, as they are labeled 1 and 2. However, one is able to discern several distinct sections of the script where the characters suddenly “switch personalities” and run through the same scenario. Due to the flowing nature of the script, the actor’s voice is hence crucial in projecting this distinct change to the audience. With the voice, the actor may employ different techniques such as varied intonation, speed, and even a change in accent to suggest this difference in character.
Sources:
http://www.drwag.com/963.html
http://atgbcentral.com/actorspeaks.html
http://www.amazon.com/Voice-Actor-Cicely-Berry/dp/0020415559
4. Is voice the most important ‘tool’ for an actor? Why or why not?
The voice is the most important ‘tool’ for an actor, in my opinion.
The nature of theatre is such that the ‘live’ quality means the actor’s projection of the character to the audience is hampered by distance. As such, it is more difficult for audience members that are further away to pick up details such as facial expressions of the actors. Unless these physical aspects are magnified by use of multimedia, it is sound or rather, the voice of the actor that reaches the furthest. After all, it is the voice that tells the story in the play, hence the need for a script in the first place.
As mentioned, since the voice is most accessible, it is thus the most important ‘tool’ for an actor when is comes to characterization. A key trait of plays is that they are substantiated by dialogue, it rarely seen that actors do not speak for most of the play in conventional drama. Hence, the continued dialogue is also the vehicle by which the actor is able to capture and define the character he is playing.
Granted, actors do also employ other methods to achieve this end, however they do not work independent of the other methods. All of them are employed to create a wholesome, realistic character. Other ‘tools’ that the actor may hence employ are body language, facial expression, costume and props. Where all of these play a part in creating a character on stage, I feel that a large percentage of it relies on the actor’s voice.
- Hui Yi
The main things that an actor has to keep in mind are the awareness of his voice, his breathing, and his posture. The first step to for the actor to have an awareness of his own voice; he should listen and be aware while he speaks, to determine if his tone, pitch and volume is suitable for the role he is playing. Quoting Cicely Berry in her work Voice and the Actor, some actors “have an overbalance of head resonance”. This means that the sound they are producing is mainly placed in the head area, without reinforcement from the chest notes. In this case, the actor hears his voice in his head and it sounds fine to him, but to a listener the voice is thin and lacking in warmth, thus actor has also to collect feedback from a test audience. Being aware of his own voice is the key to an actor identifying problems with his voice production and hence taking steps to rectify them.
The correct breathing technique is crucial to better volume, which is important in acting if the audience is to hear any of the dialogue at all. Adequate breath is required to vibrate the vocal folds to produce voice, hence deep and controlled breathing contributes greatly to an actor’s voice. An actor that has mastered control over his breathing is also able to reach a wider vocal range, hence his tone is free and uninhibited.
Both Rodenburg and Berry preach the importance of posture in voice production, and agree that a large part of speech and projection problems lie in tensions in various parts of the body. An actor’s body is hence supposed to be relaxed, supported, and with a straight back so the rib cage is able to expand unconstrained. A bad posture would greatly affect the volume, pitch and resonance of the actor’s voice, as more often than not a hunched posture hindered the airways and the sloping inwards of the shoulders also served to compress the ribcage.
Voice helps characterization in portraying emotions, personality and thoughts. A change in the character’s emotion is also mainly picked up by the audience as a change in the tone of the voice. Due to the nature of the stage, the most accessible quality of the actors to the audience is his voice, and it is the voice that tells the story in most cases.
In She’s Dead by Paul Abelman, there is a complete lack of stage directions, and even character names, as they are labeled 1 and 2. However, one is able to discern several distinct sections of the script where the characters suddenly “switch personalities” and run through the same scenario. Due to the flowing nature of the script, the actor’s voice is hence crucial in projecting this distinct change to the audience. With the voice, the actor may employ different techniques such as varied intonation, speed, and even a change in accent to suggest this difference in character.
Sources:
http://www.drwag.com/963.html
http://atgbcentral.com/actorspeaks.html
http://www.amazon.com/Voice-Actor-Cicely-Berry/dp/0020415559
4. Is voice the most important ‘tool’ for an actor? Why or why not?
The voice is the most important ‘tool’ for an actor, in my opinion.
The nature of theatre is such that the ‘live’ quality means the actor’s projection of the character to the audience is hampered by distance. As such, it is more difficult for audience members that are further away to pick up details such as facial expressions of the actors. Unless these physical aspects are magnified by use of multimedia, it is sound or rather, the voice of the actor that reaches the furthest. After all, it is the voice that tells the story in the play, hence the need for a script in the first place.
As mentioned, since the voice is most accessible, it is thus the most important ‘tool’ for an actor when is comes to characterization. A key trait of plays is that they are substantiated by dialogue, it rarely seen that actors do not speak for most of the play in conventional drama. Hence, the continued dialogue is also the vehicle by which the actor is able to capture and define the character he is playing.
Granted, actors do also employ other methods to achieve this end, however they do not work independent of the other methods. All of them are employed to create a wholesome, realistic character. Other ‘tools’ that the actor may hence employ are body language, facial expression, costume and props. Where all of these play a part in creating a character on stage, I feel that a large percentage of it relies on the actor’s voice.
- Hui Yi
Characterisation: Objectives
1. Apply the Stanislavskian 'magic if' to this extract. How does it help you to build the character of Emma or Jerry?
The Stanislavskian method of the ‘magic if’ encompasses the skill of the actor placing himself or herself in a situation that he or she has never experienced before. The actor has to fully believe in the given circumstances as presented in the script, and take it for the truth. In this case, by imagining a scenario not even present in the script, the actor is able to explore the full range of the character’s emotion and personality.
This would help to a larger extent the presentation of the character, as not only would it give a more convincing physical response – tone of voice, expression, body language – to events in the play, it also takes care of the subtle nuances in the character’s behaviour that is more often than not picked up by the audience.
In the case of Betrayal by Harold Pinter, the scant stage directions provide much freedom of interpretation of the characters’ motivations and behaviour. Taking on Emma’s character, her lines in the script have to be analysed and evaluated as a whole to ensure a wholesome performance where the character’s actions don’t contradict each other. Hence, by employing the Stanislavskian ‘magic if’, a real, fleshed-out Emma can be created that would project a consistent and natural performance as opposed to the actor ‘trying to be Emma’ by attaching specified actions to each block of dialogue.
I would build the character of Emma by imagining who initiated the meeting, Emma’s expectations and insecurities just before the meeting, to determine the mindset of Emma during their tête-à-tête. Having this information would provide motivation for Emma’s actions and expressions. Another area of character exploration would be imagine, WWED (what would Emma do), i.e. creating hypothetical situations for Emma and anticipating her natural reaction. This could serve as a test of sorts to ensure that I have fully defined her character such that she is able to function in any given situation, or work in reverse to help explore the character further. In Betrayal, asking “How would Emma react if Jerry asked to re-kindle the affair?” makes the actor think about Emma’s feelings towards Jerry, thus we’d know that if she liked him, she wouldn’t do things like seem aloof or uninterested during their conversation. By applying the ‘magic if’, not only do we build Emma’s character, we reduce the chances of the actor acting out of character.
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislavsky_System
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:CpLyPfYOFPwJ:138.87.77.20/NewSocrates/Fine%2520Arts/Theatre/Stanislavski%2520Method%2520(Tests).doc+%22magic+if%22+stanislavki&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=15
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A5133151
2. Read up on the works of Vsevolod Meyerhold and his theory of 'biomechanics', and Stanislavski's main concepts. Which approach to acting do you find easier to adopt?
Personally, I find the Stanislavski’s methods would be easier to adopt.
Meyerhold’s ‘biomechanics’ method of actor training requires the actor to endure taxing physical training and to practice a series of exercises that develops the actor’s spatial intelligence, and is ultimately supposed to develop theatrical skills. Stanislavski’s concepts mainly stress on internalizing the character wholly to be able to project a more realistic performance.
Although we have not fully explored Meyerhold’s techniques in our practice sessions, Stanislavski’s concepts appeal more to me theoretically, and seem more practical and effective. Stanislavski works from inside out, while Meyerhold is the converse. It would also seem that Stan works from the particular to the general, while Meyerhold requires the actor to master a general range of skills to apply to the particular. Clearly, Stanislavski’s concepts require much less effort and exertion on the actor’s part, as compared to the rigorous physical exercises of biomechanics.
In my opinion, where the script is concerned, the actor’s main aim is to dramatize a character as realistically as possible. Stanislavski’s method allows the actor to achieve that in a clear-cut process, whereas I feel Meyerfold’s method expends much more time and energy, where the end result does not even apply directly to the purpose in mind. Furthermore, the actors require time to learn and master these techniques where the Stanislavski method requires much less so.
In practice, Stanislavski’s main concepts are easier to grasp and relate to for me because it is more straightforward. Imagination is used to help the actor understand some part of the character’s psyche, and in the event where his imagination fails, he is able to draw examples from real life. However, I feel that ‘biomechanics’ is more abstract and the actor is expected to draw his own links from the skills he has learnt to the stage. All in all, what value the actor is able to obtain from this method is a small fraction of the effort put in as compared to the Stanislavski method.
Sources:
http://web.syr.edu/~kjbaum/meyerholdsbiomechanics.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A5133151
- Hui Yi
The Stanislavskian method of the ‘magic if’ encompasses the skill of the actor placing himself or herself in a situation that he or she has never experienced before. The actor has to fully believe in the given circumstances as presented in the script, and take it for the truth. In this case, by imagining a scenario not even present in the script, the actor is able to explore the full range of the character’s emotion and personality.
This would help to a larger extent the presentation of the character, as not only would it give a more convincing physical response – tone of voice, expression, body language – to events in the play, it also takes care of the subtle nuances in the character’s behaviour that is more often than not picked up by the audience.
In the case of Betrayal by Harold Pinter, the scant stage directions provide much freedom of interpretation of the characters’ motivations and behaviour. Taking on Emma’s character, her lines in the script have to be analysed and evaluated as a whole to ensure a wholesome performance where the character’s actions don’t contradict each other. Hence, by employing the Stanislavskian ‘magic if’, a real, fleshed-out Emma can be created that would project a consistent and natural performance as opposed to the actor ‘trying to be Emma’ by attaching specified actions to each block of dialogue.
I would build the character of Emma by imagining who initiated the meeting, Emma’s expectations and insecurities just before the meeting, to determine the mindset of Emma during their tête-à-tête. Having this information would provide motivation for Emma’s actions and expressions. Another area of character exploration would be imagine, WWED (what would Emma do), i.e. creating hypothetical situations for Emma and anticipating her natural reaction. This could serve as a test of sorts to ensure that I have fully defined her character such that she is able to function in any given situation, or work in reverse to help explore the character further. In Betrayal, asking “How would Emma react if Jerry asked to re-kindle the affair?” makes the actor think about Emma’s feelings towards Jerry, thus we’d know that if she liked him, she wouldn’t do things like seem aloof or uninterested during their conversation. By applying the ‘magic if’, not only do we build Emma’s character, we reduce the chances of the actor acting out of character.
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislavsky_System
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:CpLyPfYOFPwJ:138.87.77.20/NewSocrates/Fine%2520Arts/Theatre/Stanislavski%2520Method%2520(Tests).doc+%22magic+if%22+stanislavki&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=15
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A5133151
2. Read up on the works of Vsevolod Meyerhold and his theory of 'biomechanics', and Stanislavski's main concepts. Which approach to acting do you find easier to adopt?
Personally, I find the Stanislavski’s methods would be easier to adopt.
Meyerhold’s ‘biomechanics’ method of actor training requires the actor to endure taxing physical training and to practice a series of exercises that develops the actor’s spatial intelligence, and is ultimately supposed to develop theatrical skills. Stanislavski’s concepts mainly stress on internalizing the character wholly to be able to project a more realistic performance.
Although we have not fully explored Meyerhold’s techniques in our practice sessions, Stanislavski’s concepts appeal more to me theoretically, and seem more practical and effective. Stanislavski works from inside out, while Meyerhold is the converse. It would also seem that Stan works from the particular to the general, while Meyerhold requires the actor to master a general range of skills to apply to the particular. Clearly, Stanislavski’s concepts require much less effort and exertion on the actor’s part, as compared to the rigorous physical exercises of biomechanics.
In my opinion, where the script is concerned, the actor’s main aim is to dramatize a character as realistically as possible. Stanislavski’s method allows the actor to achieve that in a clear-cut process, whereas I feel Meyerfold’s method expends much more time and energy, where the end result does not even apply directly to the purpose in mind. Furthermore, the actors require time to learn and master these techniques where the Stanislavski method requires much less so.
In practice, Stanislavski’s main concepts are easier to grasp and relate to for me because it is more straightforward. Imagination is used to help the actor understand some part of the character’s psyche, and in the event where his imagination fails, he is able to draw examples from real life. However, I feel that ‘biomechanics’ is more abstract and the actor is expected to draw his own links from the skills he has learnt to the stage. All in all, what value the actor is able to obtain from this method is a small fraction of the effort put in as compared to the Stanislavski method.
Sources:
http://web.syr.edu/~kjbaum/meyerholdsbiomechanics.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A5133151
- Hui Yi
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Edward Albee, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?: Physicality, awareness of space
Edward Albee, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?: Physicality, awareness of space
5. What inhibitions do you still have in using your body to express yourself? What are the strategies you can use to overcome this?
One inhibition that I possess is the usage of a space well enough. Usually or all the time, I see the stage as too large an empty space which I am not comfortable with. When I am on stage (blackbox), I usually feel that I am not doing something correctly and thus have little confidence in the actions that I commit. For example, in my previous group’s production, I am working with nothing but an empty circle bound by darkness. I feel insecure that I am supposed to be around nothing. One solution to this is practice. A large reason why I feel insecure is due to poor practice that is not serious. Due to this, I feel like I am in that space for the first time when I am performing it. By having various practices on spatial awareness such as the “Cube”, where I imagine myself in a cuboidal room doing everyday activities, I can claim my own space and have more confidence in the space I work in.
Secondly, I have problems in imagining that a prop is real and is not just a prop. For example, in Moritz’s production, I felt that I was kicking a prop, not a chair. This inhibition is imagination can cause serious problems when working in production next year, as I do not have full belief that I am my character. However, this can be solved by using Stanislavski’s method, “Magic If”. I have read that actors are children and that actors should imagine their props as how a child imagines that their action figure or doll is living. By utilizing the “Magic If”, I can use various props which have no relation to my script. This will build up my imagination and I would then be able to use props as they were real objects.
6. Read up on the works of Rudolf Laban and Jacques LeCoq. To what extent do you think their works can help an actor be more adept in the use of space and their own physicality as an actor?
Rudolf Laban was a central European dance artist and theorist who published a dance notation system known as Labanotation. This notation system uses abstract symbols to define 4 important aspects of movement, the direction of the movement, part of the body doing the movement, level of the movement and the length of time it takes to do the movement. By using Labanotation, actors can document their own actions and movements on stage. This will allow actors to learn and analyze their movements in an easier manner which is effective, as it covers every movement of a person. This ‘language of movement’ enhances the ability of an actor to picture movement on-stage and thus, spatial awareness can be improved. By using the notations for floor plans, actors can basically imagine themselves moving about in a space. This will allow the planning of actions on-stage to be more flexible, as it can be done anywhere.
Jacques LeCoq was a French actor, mime and an acting instructor. His acting style was one that was aimed at a closer interaction with the audience, included an extended use of general space and a focus on the physical rather than the emotional side of the character to impact the audience. LeCoq has trained his students with emotional and physical exercises, which were clowning and acrobatics. He has also encouraged spontaneous mime. In addition, students were made to wear masks and they learned how body movements could turn facial blankness into expression. By learning how the body moves without using facial expressions, actors can fully depend on their movements and develop them.
In conclusion, I feel that both Rudolf Laban’s and Jacques LeCoq’s works can assist an actor in being more adept in physicality and spatial use as they allow actors to practice and focus on the body’s movement and actions.
Bibliography :
http://user.uni-frankfurt.de/~griesbec/LABANE.HTML#Conclusion
http://www.europamagna.org/pageshtml/Pgtheatre/SCOUT/StageIUFM/jlecoqeng.htm
Isa Ong
5. What inhibitions do you still have in using your body to express yourself? What are the strategies you can use to overcome this?
One inhibition that I possess is the usage of a space well enough. Usually or all the time, I see the stage as too large an empty space which I am not comfortable with. When I am on stage (blackbox), I usually feel that I am not doing something correctly and thus have little confidence in the actions that I commit. For example, in my previous group’s production, I am working with nothing but an empty circle bound by darkness. I feel insecure that I am supposed to be around nothing. One solution to this is practice. A large reason why I feel insecure is due to poor practice that is not serious. Due to this, I feel like I am in that space for the first time when I am performing it. By having various practices on spatial awareness such as the “Cube”, where I imagine myself in a cuboidal room doing everyday activities, I can claim my own space and have more confidence in the space I work in.
Secondly, I have problems in imagining that a prop is real and is not just a prop. For example, in Moritz’s production, I felt that I was kicking a prop, not a chair. This inhibition is imagination can cause serious problems when working in production next year, as I do not have full belief that I am my character. However, this can be solved by using Stanislavski’s method, “Magic If”. I have read that actors are children and that actors should imagine their props as how a child imagines that their action figure or doll is living. By utilizing the “Magic If”, I can use various props which have no relation to my script. This will build up my imagination and I would then be able to use props as they were real objects.
6. Read up on the works of Rudolf Laban and Jacques LeCoq. To what extent do you think their works can help an actor be more adept in the use of space and their own physicality as an actor?
Rudolf Laban was a central European dance artist and theorist who published a dance notation system known as Labanotation. This notation system uses abstract symbols to define 4 important aspects of movement, the direction of the movement, part of the body doing the movement, level of the movement and the length of time it takes to do the movement. By using Labanotation, actors can document their own actions and movements on stage. This will allow actors to learn and analyze their movements in an easier manner which is effective, as it covers every movement of a person. This ‘language of movement’ enhances the ability of an actor to picture movement on-stage and thus, spatial awareness can be improved. By using the notations for floor plans, actors can basically imagine themselves moving about in a space. This will allow the planning of actions on-stage to be more flexible, as it can be done anywhere.
Jacques LeCoq was a French actor, mime and an acting instructor. His acting style was one that was aimed at a closer interaction with the audience, included an extended use of general space and a focus on the physical rather than the emotional side of the character to impact the audience. LeCoq has trained his students with emotional and physical exercises, which were clowning and acrobatics. He has also encouraged spontaneous mime. In addition, students were made to wear masks and they learned how body movements could turn facial blankness into expression. By learning how the body moves without using facial expressions, actors can fully depend on their movements and develop them.
In conclusion, I feel that both Rudolf Laban’s and Jacques LeCoq’s works can assist an actor in being more adept in physicality and spatial use as they allow actors to practice and focus on the body’s movement and actions.
Bibliography :
http://user.uni-frankfurt.de/~griesbec/LABANE.HTML#Conclusion
http://www.europamagna.org/pageshtml/Pgtheatre/SCOUT/StageIUFM/jlecoqeng.htm
Isa Ong
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)