We rehearsed and refined each small part of the show until we knew them well enough to slowly put them all together. Our first proper run through was the week before the week of our performance. Different parts of the show took a different amount of time, but I think the scenes between A,B,C and D were the most difficult because they were longer lines that we had to learn and some people had monologues. We had quite a few other things to be learning outside of theatre workshop too, so that made it harder. Also, we didn't have permanent roles so we wore placards instead to identify who we were meant to be. For example, I had "Old Lady 2" and "A". These were worn to remind the audience that they were watching a performance where we were portraying the characters, not being the characters which is something that is very strict in brechtian theatre.
The Songs
There were two songs that we had to learn for Blondie and these were "Vote Me" and "Here Comes the Prime Minister". We weren't even learning the words to the real songs, we had another version to sing that both Sarah and Lee Ryan had written themselves. I think it's fair to say that we aren't a very gifted strand when it comes to learning and singing songs because the Songs were the last things that we learnt properly. Vote Me was the opening song to the show and Tian started it off by being carried into the middle of the stage and slut dropping on the table before having his own little verse. Then we came in and sung the rest of the song with him. The he crowd-surfed and that is how we took him off stage. Then the "Who Did You Vote For?" parts began.
Here Comes The Prime Minister was a rap and I think we learnt this quicker. The staging was four groups at one corner each facing the audience and each of the blondie's moved anti-clockwise through the groups and we did a sequence of very basic movement inspired by the lyrics of the song. Even though these movements were simple and easy, we found it hard to remember when one move was when. But this all came together as well, and we loved it when we understood it.
The Scenes
Our people in power scenes were easy to remember because we were the ones who made these and personally, this is the part that I enjoyed performing the most because I found myself absolutely hilarious. We had to modify a few bits though. For example: when George Bush (Jack) calls me (Mr Iraq), we decided to have a ringtone and I would have a tiny tantrum because I don't know how to answer my phone. Then I find out it's a slide. I was inspired by adults who can't use smartphonesfor that part. During the phonecall, I had a bad signal and was walking around to find \a good spot, I settled for standing on a chair in an awkward position before saying "Come get bitch" when George announced war on Iraq for the oil. We decided it would be good to have a part where our actions were narrated because it's brechtian theatre and we felt that our scene wasn't brechtian enough, so Jack and Katie narrated the part where me and Charlie get killed by the American Soldiers.
The "Who did you vote for?" parts were short but they needed consistency, precision and a lot of energy because the transitions needed to be quick but neat. We didn't have any props for this part, so those who weren't speaking were objects or people in the background. The lines for this part were short so we learnt them in no time. It was what came next that we found difficult. These scenes were short and fast-paced so we were a bit everywhere when we had to make the next scene. Sarah solved this by spending about 15 minutes walking through it with us until we were crystal clear about the order.
Finally, our A B C D scenes. These were the hardest and the most naturalistic parts we had to play. As I earlier mentioned, these were the parts where we had longer lines and we had to be se3rious instead of exaggerating and over-doing our characterisation. This proved the most difficult part for me as well because I kept on forgetting my lines or getting half way through a paragraph and forgetting what came next. I was good in terms of characterisation but lines were an issue. Luckily I sorted this out by the second to last rehearsal.
Tuesday, 18 December 2012
Evaluation
Today was stressful but enjoyable. We performed our show twice; once for the rest of the strand, the test audience, and the second time for our friends and family who were the main audience. The audiences were very different in terms of reaction and size, but more so in terms of reaction.
The first performance I think went better because we put in a lot more energy than we did in the run throughs and we had just seen the two other groups perform; we absolutely loved their performances and wanted the same reaction they got from everyone so we upped our game. I think what made our first performance so much better than the second was the audience's reaction because they laughed at the bits we wanted them to laugh at and were silent and concentrated at the bits we wanted them so be silent at. They sang along to "Where is the Love?" as they came in and I feel that diffused the atmosphere a lot because we all became a lot more comfortable and the nerves disappeared. Us actors were able to see their reactions and that helped us a lot in terms of acting and making the performance more enjoyable to watch, for example if we could see someone was starting to lose interest, you could put more energy into what you're doing or more volume into your words.
The second performance was very different to our first performance. To start off with we had some technical issues because Sarah blew the speakers after playing the music too loud in our rehearsals and previous performance, so we had to get different speakers and then they didn't work either then after a few minutes the music was sfinally playing. The beginning to that show made it really awkward for us actors and the audience. As the show went on, we did everything the same as before with the same amount of energy and volume, but the audience laughed at nothing. It was like performing to the emotionally deprived. a few people smiled and chuckled and I'm happy that they did because our show was meant to make people laugh and the fact that they didn't laugh was actually quite discouraging. Otherwise everything else went well.
When I compare the audiences together, I can conclude that a performance will be a lot more enjoyable for both the audience and actors and goes much better if the audience react how you want them to. The first show was better because the audience was better and more open with reacting. They enjoyed it and so did we whereas the second audience proved more difficult to please but when I think about it, they don't know much about Brecht or his theatre so they were probably trying to get their heads around that first. Also, they were of a different age range.
Personally, I think I did quite well for myself because I made the audience laugh, remembered my lines and ques and I pushed my physicality and kept the energy going. I had room for improvement though. For example: I could have been a bit more louder when I was speaking because mum said she couldn't hear much, eye contact with the audience was poor and at one or two points, it looked like I had forgotten my lines when I actually hadn't. The audience was laughing just as I was starting to say my line and I started it again, which wasn't such a smart idea, but I didn't think about what to do if something like that happened.
The message we were trying to get across to the audience was put across. Even though both audiences were different, they bot understood our message and when I asked several members of both audiences, they said that our show was enjoyable but it was deep and it made them think about how looks and politics tie in together, think carefully about who you vote for, genocides, and how you judge a politician. So overall I am happy with what we've achieved.
The first performance I think went better because we put in a lot more energy than we did in the run throughs and we had just seen the two other groups perform; we absolutely loved their performances and wanted the same reaction they got from everyone so we upped our game. I think what made our first performance so much better than the second was the audience's reaction because they laughed at the bits we wanted them to laugh at and were silent and concentrated at the bits we wanted them so be silent at. They sang along to "Where is the Love?" as they came in and I feel that diffused the atmosphere a lot because we all became a lot more comfortable and the nerves disappeared. Us actors were able to see their reactions and that helped us a lot in terms of acting and making the performance more enjoyable to watch, for example if we could see someone was starting to lose interest, you could put more energy into what you're doing or more volume into your words.
The second performance was very different to our first performance. To start off with we had some technical issues because Sarah blew the speakers after playing the music too loud in our rehearsals and previous performance, so we had to get different speakers and then they didn't work either then after a few minutes the music was sfinally playing. The beginning to that show made it really awkward for us actors and the audience. As the show went on, we did everything the same as before with the same amount of energy and volume, but the audience laughed at nothing. It was like performing to the emotionally deprived. a few people smiled and chuckled and I'm happy that they did because our show was meant to make people laugh and the fact that they didn't laugh was actually quite discouraging. Otherwise everything else went well.
When I compare the audiences together, I can conclude that a performance will be a lot more enjoyable for both the audience and actors and goes much better if the audience react how you want them to. The first show was better because the audience was better and more open with reacting. They enjoyed it and so did we whereas the second audience proved more difficult to please but when I think about it, they don't know much about Brecht or his theatre so they were probably trying to get their heads around that first. Also, they were of a different age range.
Personally, I think I did quite well for myself because I made the audience laugh, remembered my lines and ques and I pushed my physicality and kept the energy going. I had room for improvement though. For example: I could have been a bit more louder when I was speaking because mum said she couldn't hear much, eye contact with the audience was poor and at one or two points, it looked like I had forgotten my lines when I actually hadn't. The audience was laughing just as I was starting to say my line and I started it again, which wasn't such a smart idea, but I didn't think about what to do if something like that happened.
The message we were trying to get across to the audience was put across. Even though both audiences were different, they bot understood our message and when I asked several members of both audiences, they said that our show was enjoyable but it was deep and it made them think about how looks and politics tie in together, think carefully about who you vote for, genocides, and how you judge a politician. So overall I am happy with what we've achieved.
My Characters in Blondie
1. A
My character in the play itself is "A". I find that A is the officer who represents the majority of people who are disgusted by Blondie's crimes and finds mass murders of any type abhorrent. The A's of this world would read about a murder or mass murder in the newspaper and cry , shake their heads and rant on about the crime for ages after hearing about it. He's the more serious officer of the two because C is just there having intimate eye contact with Blondie across the table. He would represent the people who would see a crime and perhaps admire the murderer. He is also the person who is still proud of voting for Blondie even after the genocide and also quite the air-head.
I knew from the start that A was a man so I had to sit like a man so I decided that when I went to sit down I would pull up my trousers (or whatever bottoms I happen to be wearing on the day) and lean forward onto my legs. I would either sit like that or i wouldcross my legs but cross them like men do which is where the foot is resting on their thigh annd the rest of the leg is just hovering. I would either lean back in the chair or I would lean on my legs but I had to be careful not to look to feminine, A is a very well-built, manly man in my eyes so the slightest sign of womanliness would make him look camp. In terms of speaking like A, I couldn't adjust my voice to sound like a man's voice because I'd sound like the Billy the Clown off the Saw movies. Instead I spoke slower (like Snape from Harry Potter) and used a patronising and condescending tone towards Blondie.
People in power scenes: Mr Iraq and little Iraqi girl
For the people in power scenes, I'm playing Mr Iraq and he's more of a representation of the whole of Iraq. To play him I didn't really have much of a physicality because he didn't really move much but he's a man of luxury. I did play around with the voice and accent for Mr Iraq and I had a lot of fun with it. I can't actually do an Iraqi accent and keep it going for long at all so I made up the accent as I went along. My accent sounded Russian with a stroke of Indian and my voice naturally switched to a whiny voice but it was funny and our people in power scene was meant to be funny, so there were no changes that needed to be made in that area.
The second character I played was little Iraqi girl who was only on stage for under a minute. She was chasing a puppy across the war field and got shot by an American soldier even though she posed no threat to them. The part was small, but memorable. For her character, I decided that she would be an airy-fairy little girl who skipped everywhere with a high-pitched voice, an average young girl. On stage, I didn't say much apart from "OOOH PUPPY IT'S SO CUTE" and I got shot after that sentence anyway so not much needed to be done. Apparently, my Iraqi girl impersonation was funny because everyone was laughing, especially when I got shot.
My character in the play itself is "A". I find that A is the officer who represents the majority of people who are disgusted by Blondie's crimes and finds mass murders of any type abhorrent. The A's of this world would read about a murder or mass murder in the newspaper and cry , shake their heads and rant on about the crime for ages after hearing about it. He's the more serious officer of the two because C is just there having intimate eye contact with Blondie across the table. He would represent the people who would see a crime and perhaps admire the murderer. He is also the person who is still proud of voting for Blondie even after the genocide and also quite the air-head.
I knew from the start that A was a man so I had to sit like a man so I decided that when I went to sit down I would pull up my trousers (or whatever bottoms I happen to be wearing on the day) and lean forward onto my legs. I would either sit like that or i wouldcross my legs but cross them like men do which is where the foot is resting on their thigh annd the rest of the leg is just hovering. I would either lean back in the chair or I would lean on my legs but I had to be careful not to look to feminine, A is a very well-built, manly man in my eyes so the slightest sign of womanliness would make him look camp. In terms of speaking like A, I couldn't adjust my voice to sound like a man's voice because I'd sound like the Billy the Clown off the Saw movies. Instead I spoke slower (like Snape from Harry Potter) and used a patronising and condescending tone towards Blondie.
People in power scenes: Mr Iraq and little Iraqi girl
For the people in power scenes, I'm playing Mr Iraq and he's more of a representation of the whole of Iraq. To play him I didn't really have much of a physicality because he didn't really move much but he's a man of luxury. I did play around with the voice and accent for Mr Iraq and I had a lot of fun with it. I can't actually do an Iraqi accent and keep it going for long at all so I made up the accent as I went along. My accent sounded Russian with a stroke of Indian and my voice naturally switched to a whiny voice but it was funny and our people in power scene was meant to be funny, so there were no changes that needed to be made in that area.
The second character I played was little Iraqi girl who was only on stage for under a minute. She was chasing a puppy across the war field and got shot by an American soldier even though she posed no threat to them. The part was small, but memorable. For her character, I decided that she would be an airy-fairy little girl who skipped everywhere with a high-pitched voice, an average young girl. On stage, I didn't say much apart from "OOOH PUPPY IT'S SO CUTE" and I got shot after that sentence anyway so not much needed to be done. Apparently, my Iraqi girl impersonation was funny because everyone was laughing, especially when I got shot.
Sunday, 16 December 2012
Brecht's Theatre
Brecht's theatre was and still is very unlike you average theatre, this is how he liked it. There are many aspects which made Epic theatre what it is and there are differences almost everywhere you look.
The plays
Brecht's plays were made not to entertain the audeince, but to provoke thought. His plays were about things that were currently happening in society that nobody gave much thought to and these issues were often political. The structure of the plays were different as well because most plays have a linear storyline where one thing happens straight after the other, like a book whereas Brecht changed a lot of this. His plays were more like episodes and not necessarily in order. After one scene there would often be a break where there would be music or something other and during these breaks, there would be a stage change (if necessary) and the audience could briefly think about what they had just seen. He included music and songs in his plays so they were almost musicals, this sometimes lightened up the mood but then the mood was pulled back to reality because Brecht didn't aim to make the audience happy.
The Actors
The actors in epic theatre were also very different in terms of how they portrayed the character. In normal theatre, the actors are to become the character and leave their own characteristics at the side, Brecht wanted his actors to know that they were to portray the characters instead of becoming them, so theey were just pretending. He wanted it this way so that his audience would remember that they were only watching a piece of theatre, he didn't want for them to fully immerse in a story that was being told on stage, not actually happening on stage.
There is also a technique that was used in epic theatre called Gestus. Gestus is something where the actors would create a still image or gestures that represented their characters on stage.
The Alienation effect
Otherwise known as the " Verfremdungseffekt" . This technique was all about making the familiar unfamiliar and making the audience think about the message the play was putting across.
The Audience
Brecht wanted his audience to be at ease and relaxed because they would then watch the play, be more entertained and think. He would make sure that they were relaxed by letting them smoke in the theatre which wasn't common at all back then and is prohibited now (nobody wants the theatre to go on fire)
The plays
Brecht's plays were made not to entertain the audeince, but to provoke thought. His plays were about things that were currently happening in society that nobody gave much thought to and these issues were often political. The structure of the plays were different as well because most plays have a linear storyline where one thing happens straight after the other, like a book whereas Brecht changed a lot of this. His plays were more like episodes and not necessarily in order. After one scene there would often be a break where there would be music or something other and during these breaks, there would be a stage change (if necessary) and the audience could briefly think about what they had just seen. He included music and songs in his plays so they were almost musicals, this sometimes lightened up the mood but then the mood was pulled back to reality because Brecht didn't aim to make the audience happy.
The Actors
The actors in epic theatre were also very different in terms of how they portrayed the character. In normal theatre, the actors are to become the character and leave their own characteristics at the side, Brecht wanted his actors to know that they were to portray the characters instead of becoming them, so theey were just pretending. He wanted it this way so that his audience would remember that they were only watching a piece of theatre, he didn't want for them to fully immerse in a story that was being told on stage, not actually happening on stage.
There is also a technique that was used in epic theatre called Gestus. Gestus is something where the actors would create a still image or gestures that represented their characters on stage.
The Alienation effect
Otherwise known as the " Verfremdungseffekt" . This technique was all about making the familiar unfamiliar and making the audience think about the message the play was putting across.
The Audience
Brecht wanted his audience to be at ease and relaxed because they would then watch the play, be more entertained and think. He would make sure that they were relaxed by letting them smoke in the theatre which wasn't common at all back then and is prohibited now (nobody wants the theatre to go on fire)
Sunday, 2 December 2012
Political Protests
Those who were in my protest group are Dee, me, Saffron and Charlie and our protest was called "Don't Do Nothing, Do Something". The cause we were protesting for isn't straightforward, but in a nutshell, we were protesting for people to do something when they see something happening instead of watching from the sidelines and doing absolutely nothing about it.
For example there is the James Bulger case where this little boy was abducted from a butcher's by two ten year old boys , beaten up and was walked through the streets .Fifteen people walked past him and his kidnappers, knew something wasn't right but didn't take their suspicions any further even though he had a bump on his head and was crying for his mother. The boys then took two year old James to an unused train station where they tortured and killed him. Had somebody listened to their instincts and taken action, James would probably still be alive.
We went ahead with the idea of acting when you see something bad happening and we knew we needed something eye-catching so we'd attract a bigger audience This reminded me and a few others of a time where Dee's history class stood around in the courtyard one break time in absolute stillness and not responding to those around them. I remember that it was an odd sight to see and when I had tried to get my friend to go to the canteen with me (I ended up going alone because she wasn't responding) I became really confused. It's not something you see every day and many people just stood at the sides and stared or some others were trying to get a reaction from the standers.
We took this idea and used it in our protest. The routine we decided on was: we were sat in a row (order: Saffron, Charlie, me, Dee), but we knew we needed something more because after a while sitting still gets boring for us and the audience. So one by one, we set off in doing something that we may or may not see daily but either way we did something unnerving: Saffron screamed, Charlie was a drunk homeless, I collapsed and Dee did nothing. This continued for about five seconds then we all turned to look up at Dee who was stood at a slight distance then she opened her cardigan to reveal a bloody stab wound (fake of course) and was writhing in pain on the floor. She would go for the audience's feet (this was to include the audience in our protest because protests include audience interaction a lot), Charlie and Saffron stuck post it notes saying "Do something" or "Don't do nothing" and I was sat there holding a sign saying "Don't do nothing, do something". Me and Charlie picked up Dee and pushed her about until she fell then we sat back down in stillness, then Charlie became a drunk homeless and hassled the audience while me and the others went around the audience explaining what we were doing, that it was a protest and how it's relevant to our lives. Then we sat back down and repeated.
The audience reaction was kind of what I was expecting. We started the protest at about 10:45/50 am and there were loads of other people doing their protests around the school too so we weren't the only ones. To start with, we sat in the foyer in our line with masking tape crossed over our mouths sat eerily still and nonreactive. People from other p16 strands on their break came to see what we were doing and they spoke to us but quickly understood we were doing a silent protest; some of them laughed, got creeped out and others just gave us bad looks. When there was a big enough group, Saffron started screaming and we started our routine. NOBODY was expecting that so they all got jumped and hastily moved away from us, but they watched from a distance, as more people came out we attracted a bigger audience. When Dee was on the floor and grabbing at feet they inevitably moved away, said things like "Get off me" or "I can't help you". We had the occasional person who kissed their teeth at her but I think Dee did very well, She was persistent and wasn't deterred by some responses she got. When charlie's part came along people reacted as they normally would to a beggar which was moving away or saying "I have no money" but when we went around and explained ourselves to people they instantly understood even though some of them were saying they didn't get it during our routine. We did have hecklers though who were a group of immature year 10s who didn't know how to react but there was one who was coming up to us when we were sat silently and imitated the screaming in our faces (mainly Saffron). It got annoying because he had his mouth full of baguette, he was doing it for his giggling friends and he was irritating. When he was getting too close, Saffron started screaming again and I've never seen anybody stumble as badly as he did. Not to mention his face. So we learnt how to deal with them.
Overall, I think our protest was quite effective. It wasn't your typical protest, but we got a good reaction. The two things I would change are the time taken to get back to our seats to restart after talking to the audience because some of us got there before others and we had to reapply masking tape. We were slacking. The second thing is we could have made it a bit less performanceish and more like a protest, but then again the performance side is what got us a big audience in the first place so it's debatable. I got some feedback from my friend and she said it was effective and alienating but it wasn't easy to grasp the meaning until it was explained to you. Very few people understood without it being explained to them because we had stickers on us that said "help" or "do something" or "don't do nothing" so we did drop hints. Otherwise I'm really happy with it
For example there is the James Bulger case where this little boy was abducted from a butcher's by two ten year old boys , beaten up and was walked through the streets .Fifteen people walked past him and his kidnappers, knew something wasn't right but didn't take their suspicions any further even though he had a bump on his head and was crying for his mother. The boys then took two year old James to an unused train station where they tortured and killed him. Had somebody listened to their instincts and taken action, James would probably still be alive.
We went ahead with the idea of acting when you see something bad happening and we knew we needed something eye-catching so we'd attract a bigger audience This reminded me and a few others of a time where Dee's history class stood around in the courtyard one break time in absolute stillness and not responding to those around them. I remember that it was an odd sight to see and when I had tried to get my friend to go to the canteen with me (I ended up going alone because she wasn't responding) I became really confused. It's not something you see every day and many people just stood at the sides and stared or some others were trying to get a reaction from the standers.
We took this idea and used it in our protest. The routine we decided on was: we were sat in a row (order: Saffron, Charlie, me, Dee), but we knew we needed something more because after a while sitting still gets boring for us and the audience. So one by one, we set off in doing something that we may or may not see daily but either way we did something unnerving: Saffron screamed, Charlie was a drunk homeless, I collapsed and Dee did nothing. This continued for about five seconds then we all turned to look up at Dee who was stood at a slight distance then she opened her cardigan to reveal a bloody stab wound (fake of course) and was writhing in pain on the floor. She would go for the audience's feet (this was to include the audience in our protest because protests include audience interaction a lot), Charlie and Saffron stuck post it notes saying "Do something" or "Don't do nothing" and I was sat there holding a sign saying "Don't do nothing, do something". Me and Charlie picked up Dee and pushed her about until she fell then we sat back down in stillness, then Charlie became a drunk homeless and hassled the audience while me and the others went around the audience explaining what we were doing, that it was a protest and how it's relevant to our lives. Then we sat back down and repeated.
The audience reaction was kind of what I was expecting. We started the protest at about 10:45/50 am and there were loads of other people doing their protests around the school too so we weren't the only ones. To start with, we sat in the foyer in our line with masking tape crossed over our mouths sat eerily still and nonreactive. People from other p16 strands on their break came to see what we were doing and they spoke to us but quickly understood we were doing a silent protest; some of them laughed, got creeped out and others just gave us bad looks. When there was a big enough group, Saffron started screaming and we started our routine. NOBODY was expecting that so they all got jumped and hastily moved away from us, but they watched from a distance, as more people came out we attracted a bigger audience. When Dee was on the floor and grabbing at feet they inevitably moved away, said things like "Get off me" or "I can't help you". We had the occasional person who kissed their teeth at her but I think Dee did very well, She was persistent and wasn't deterred by some responses she got. When charlie's part came along people reacted as they normally would to a beggar which was moving away or saying "I have no money" but when we went around and explained ourselves to people they instantly understood even though some of them were saying they didn't get it during our routine. We did have hecklers though who were a group of immature year 10s who didn't know how to react but there was one who was coming up to us when we were sat silently and imitated the screaming in our faces (mainly Saffron). It got annoying because he had his mouth full of baguette, he was doing it for his giggling friends and he was irritating. When he was getting too close, Saffron started screaming again and I've never seen anybody stumble as badly as he did. Not to mention his face. So we learnt how to deal with them.
Overall, I think our protest was quite effective. It wasn't your typical protest, but we got a good reaction. The two things I would change are the time taken to get back to our seats to restart after talking to the audience because some of us got there before others and we had to reapply masking tape. We were slacking. The second thing is we could have made it a bit less performanceish and more like a protest, but then again the performance side is what got us a big audience in the first place so it's debatable. I got some feedback from my friend and she said it was effective and alienating but it wasn't easy to grasp the meaning until it was explained to you. Very few people understood without it being explained to them because we had stickers on us that said "help" or "do something" or "don't do nothing" so we did drop hints. Otherwise I'm really happy with it
Sunday, 18 November 2012
Themes behind Blondie
After reading the short play we will be doing (it's called "Blondie") some of the themes hidden in the script surfaced. One that I found was the most prominent is looks in the world of politics.
Most people would say that how a politician may look is very insignificant in politics but I beg to differ. I don't think that anybody can say, hand on heart, that they've never once looked at a politician and have been slightly put off by their bad looks or subconsciously favoured the one who is better looking. Policies are obviously the most important thing when it comes to electing a new politician and party, but it is also important for the politician to have trimmed, healthy-looking hair, wear make-up (for election campaigns), suits that suit them (pardon the pun), etc. If you're a politician and you want to run for Prime Minister yet you don't take care of you're appearance, you make me laugh.
The reason I mentioned this in the first place is because B (the woman) is a newly elected prime minister with bleached blonde hair and she is deemed to be an attractive woman and from the clues I've collected in the text, she's very attractive and that's where most of her votes came from. She's an example of the point I've been trying to establish.
Here is an article I found also exploring looks in politics: http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/mitt_romney_vs_newt_gingrich_how_much_do_looks_matter_in_presidential_politics_.html
Most people would say that how a politician may look is very insignificant in politics but I beg to differ. I don't think that anybody can say, hand on heart, that they've never once looked at a politician and have been slightly put off by their bad looks or subconsciously favoured the one who is better looking. Policies are obviously the most important thing when it comes to electing a new politician and party, but it is also important for the politician to have trimmed, healthy-looking hair, wear make-up (for election campaigns), suits that suit them (pardon the pun), etc. If you're a politician and you want to run for Prime Minister yet you don't take care of you're appearance, you make me laugh.
The reason I mentioned this in the first place is because B (the woman) is a newly elected prime minister with bleached blonde hair and she is deemed to be an attractive woman and from the clues I've collected in the text, she's very attractive and that's where most of her votes came from. She's an example of the point I've been trying to establish.
Here is an article I found also exploring looks in politics: http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/mitt_romney_vs_newt_gingrich_how_much_do_looks_matter_in_presidential_politics_.html
Thursday, 8 November 2012
Lesson Numero Uno
For our first theatre workshop lesson, we did exercises that introduced us to Brecht's most important rule of theatre: the actor portrays the character instead of becoming the character.
Nursery Rhyme: For this exercise, we chose a partner, labelled ourselves as 'A' or 'B' and stood and either end of the room. I was A and Laura was B. All the B's stood at one side and were told to think of a nursery rhyme then all at once, they recited (quite loudly) the nursery rhyme. All of us A's didn't understand a word our partners had said because all of them were talking and the room was all echoey and we told them this. So the second time around, they had to do gestures, spoke more clearly and enunciated their words more, I understood better.
Mimicking: We were in pairs once again for this exercise. The way this worked is we gave ourselves the 'A' or 'B' letter and B would listen to A telling an interesting anecdote on something that recently happened to them and B would have to observe the way that A spoke and their body language as they spoke, their habits (fidgeting, shifting weight, etc) and the way that they spoke. Afterwards, we went around to each pair and watched B imitating how their A was talking and their body language but they had to choose one feature to exaggerate as well. For me, this exercise didn't push me or make me feel odd because my partner and I are quite alike in the way that we speak so the only change was voice, and her voice was slightly broader than mine. I think that in general it sounded easy to do, but for me it was hard because playing a character is one thing, but trying to imitate someone isn't half as easy because you aren't inventing this person as you would a character, the person already exists.
I can't talk for everyone though as some people were really good at imitating their partner. They took to adopting the same body language, habits, voice and speech patterns quite well. For example: Paris was imitating Crystal and they are two very different people. Paris is male and when he speaks, he doesn't do many gestures and Crystal is female and when she gets really into a story, she goes all out on her gestures and when Paris exaggerated everything, we were all in pieces because it was so funny but so true. I think it worked better for them because they're both different so there
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)