![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
When I picked which play series I would subscribe to, I knew how things would schedule out. I just didn't anticipate the side effects. The Sunday afternoon series was the one that would be the most out of the way of anything else I do. However, this means on the days I go watch a play, I do two hours of improv first. This might not be the best thing to do before going to watch other people acting on a stage. Either that, or I'm consistently watching plays that would be much more fun do than to watch. Blackbird by David Harrower has not proved to be an exception.
Let's start with the trivial first: The whole thing takes place in a break room. Apparently, in the universe this production takes place in, break rooms do not have tables. People apparently do not need them to eat lunch. Or any more than two chairs. Part of this is that this production is not in a particularly large space. They wouldn't have been pull off the physicality they'd wanted to had there been a table and any more than two chairs. Like I said, this is trivial.
I found myself far more impressed by the virtuoso performances by the two actors and the intricately crafted text than taken in by the actual story. Marianna Bassman and Bates Wilder certainly pull off two magnificent performances. The text, full of half sentences and inchoate expressions, is tough to execute, and they do it marvelously. Harrower asks the actors to replicate the stammering, stuttering speech of two people unused to expressing full bore how they feel and both actors come through with stunning realism.
I didn't get any more than intellectually involved with the play itself though. Yes, it's a hell of a piece of writing. However, I found myself thinking, "Yes, it has to go this way or he loses audience sympathy", or "Yes, that's definitely the more interesting choice" a lot. Unfortunately, for the first 10 minutes or so, I was also thinking, "Why doesn't he leave if he wants to leave so badly?"
(Also, as I learned during the audience talkback, the audience was not able to accept what I think is the most interesting choice about the characters on stage. I know I'm being vague. However, I think the play derives some of its power by unleashing a critical piece of information about 10 minutes in. I'm sure reviews spoil it all the time, but I figure if I don't have to, I won't.)
In a sign of how engaged (or not engaged) I was with the play, when the actors dumped the contents of the garbage can onto the stage, my thought at the moment (honest!) was that if this were a genre story, the contents of the garbage can would inclue to us valuable information about the world. That is, by listing what they throw away, we would learn a lot about the culture, technology level, and values of the world of the story.
Anyway, I came away thinking that it would be an interesting challenge to prepare those roles. (It's hard to imagine I will ever see them performed better than I have here. Cheers to the cast and the director, David Gammons.) Except for one crucial moment at the end though, nothing in the play transcended a "by the numbers", although exquisitely crafted, feel for me. The play seems to derive most of its power from the crucial bit of information.
I might have had a different opinion if I hadn't spent two hours beforehand identifying critical elements of character relationships and playing the games we find within scenes. This is to wonder if two hours of acting exercises is really a good idea before going to the theater as an audience member.
Speaking of this, I have just checked and there is a Harold III class. Since I enjoyed Harold I and Harold II, I will almost surely take Harold III. Likewise, they're auditioning for new Harold team members. The auditions are open only to people with previous Harold experience or training. What you do at the audition, of course, is perform a Harold. They've only allocated enough time for about 4 Harolds. I don't think they're expecting many people to audition. Scarily, I qualify. The audition will be a good experience to have under my belt. Should the bizarre and highly improbable happen, I'm prepared to join a Harold team.
(Also, if I turn out to go to the West Coast for 6 weeks this summer, I won't be able to take an improv class during the summer quarter. So, I'd like to get Harold III out of the way. I seriously doubt there will be a Harold IV. I think by that point the only way you're going to assimilate more technique and do better Harolds is to get on a Harold team and perform lots of them.)
As a side note, I've been trying to take their Musical Improv class for about as long as I've been taking improv classes. I've always had one time conflict or another. This upcoming quarter is no exception. *sigh*
Let's start with the trivial first: The whole thing takes place in a break room. Apparently, in the universe this production takes place in, break rooms do not have tables. People apparently do not need them to eat lunch. Or any more than two chairs. Part of this is that this production is not in a particularly large space. They wouldn't have been pull off the physicality they'd wanted to had there been a table and any more than two chairs. Like I said, this is trivial.
I found myself far more impressed by the virtuoso performances by the two actors and the intricately crafted text than taken in by the actual story. Marianna Bassman and Bates Wilder certainly pull off two magnificent performances. The text, full of half sentences and inchoate expressions, is tough to execute, and they do it marvelously. Harrower asks the actors to replicate the stammering, stuttering speech of two people unused to expressing full bore how they feel and both actors come through with stunning realism.
I didn't get any more than intellectually involved with the play itself though. Yes, it's a hell of a piece of writing. However, I found myself thinking, "Yes, it has to go this way or he loses audience sympathy", or "Yes, that's definitely the more interesting choice" a lot. Unfortunately, for the first 10 minutes or so, I was also thinking, "Why doesn't he leave if he wants to leave so badly?"
(Also, as I learned during the audience talkback, the audience was not able to accept what I think is the most interesting choice about the characters on stage. I know I'm being vague. However, I think the play derives some of its power by unleashing a critical piece of information about 10 minutes in. I'm sure reviews spoil it all the time, but I figure if I don't have to, I won't.)
In a sign of how engaged (or not engaged) I was with the play, when the actors dumped the contents of the garbage can onto the stage, my thought at the moment (honest!) was that if this were a genre story, the contents of the garbage can would inclue to us valuable information about the world. That is, by listing what they throw away, we would learn a lot about the culture, technology level, and values of the world of the story.
Anyway, I came away thinking that it would be an interesting challenge to prepare those roles. (It's hard to imagine I will ever see them performed better than I have here. Cheers to the cast and the director, David Gammons.) Except for one crucial moment at the end though, nothing in the play transcended a "by the numbers", although exquisitely crafted, feel for me. The play seems to derive most of its power from the crucial bit of information.
I might have had a different opinion if I hadn't spent two hours beforehand identifying critical elements of character relationships and playing the games we find within scenes. This is to wonder if two hours of acting exercises is really a good idea before going to the theater as an audience member.
Speaking of this, I have just checked and there is a Harold III class. Since I enjoyed Harold I and Harold II, I will almost surely take Harold III. Likewise, they're auditioning for new Harold team members. The auditions are open only to people with previous Harold experience or training. What you do at the audition, of course, is perform a Harold. They've only allocated enough time for about 4 Harolds. I don't think they're expecting many people to audition. Scarily, I qualify. The audition will be a good experience to have under my belt. Should the bizarre and highly improbable happen, I'm prepared to join a Harold team.
(Also, if I turn out to go to the West Coast for 6 weeks this summer, I won't be able to take an improv class during the summer quarter. So, I'd like to get Harold III out of the way. I seriously doubt there will be a Harold IV. I think by that point the only way you're going to assimilate more technique and do better Harolds is to get on a Harold team and perform lots of them.)
As a side note, I've been trying to take their Musical Improv class for about as long as I've been taking improv classes. I've always had one time conflict or another. This upcoming quarter is no exception. *sigh*
