Monday, January 30, 2006

Allison Darby

We have another response! This is, I'll admit the one I was most looking forward to receiving, if only because I've been wanting to catch up Allison on things in general. Also I knew Allison would be able to fill us up with what she calls "nonsensical theater jargon. " and I wasn't disappointed.

I'm trying to think back to this show so I can post some useful and somewhat intelligent commentary. It's definitely a play that benefits from physicalizing your research/character study as much as you can. I definitely tend to be a very heady actor, and so I remember this play being a nice challenge for me. It requires you as an actor to know your physical comfort level and then consciously push yourself beyond that point. The part I played wasn't the center of the play by any means, but there were lots of great moments, and all of the actors playing "floties" should concentrate on contributing to a very strong ensemble. You can't afford to be the kind of actor that only acts when he/she talks. A lot of my work as Frapper consisted of investing in each person I was on stage with...and in a positive way. What specific things do I LIKE about the boutros brothers? About Margueritte? About Father Flote? This is not a character that rolls around in complexity. The people in her group are bound to her by love. She tolerates what she doesn't like and LOVES all the great things about each of these people. And, as always with acting, specificity is key. Don't just say to yourself, "I like the way father flote leads us" what about him in front of you in the moment do you respond to? I just remember this play being very visceral, very tactile. The Bells character made me feel very warm and pink, the Pope made me feel like I was standing still in ice water, Father Flote made me feel like there was a horse galloping at the end of a rope tied to my rib cage.
~Also, Frapper is very connected to language. It always seemed to me that the puppet was as crucial to Frapper as a hearing aid is to a deaf person, as glasses are to the severely myopic. That puppet on the end of my hand was a medical (only in this case, faith based) device that I REQUIRED to SPEAK. I as a person really love language, and so I could really invest in the barren existence of someone unable to speak clearly. Frapper has no learning disability; there are all these ideas in his head; but before the puppet, there was no way for them to come out. There's no way for her to communicate, to relate to another person. The puppet really is a miracle on the end of her hand, its another body, another tongue that isn't plagued by the stuttering disease. Because I put a lot of investment into the puppet, some nice moments came out in my performance. The most memorable, to me, was, when we are all exectued at the end of the piece, I had the puppet silently screaming towards the audience. Being where my soul lived, it held onto life a little longer than I did.
I hope that helps, and isn't too full of nonsensical theater jargon.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home