I do enjoy performing, but going to the theatre is probably my favorite part of theatre itself. It tends to be less commitment, but still a lot can be gained from going to see a show.
That's why I was interested to talk about being a spectator in one of the workshops at the ISTA conference. Before that, I had never considered the role of the spectator in theatre. I think that it is too often overlooked, because if there is no spectator, then what is the point? I know that Dzieci would take the point of view that there doesn't need to be spectators, as long as the actors themselves benefit spiritually, but what if you don't believe in all that spiritual "mumbo-jumbo"? Aren't the spectators important, too? What I take from it is that yes, spectators are essential to theatre. After all, where does all of the huge theatre industry of Broadway's money come from? Do the actors spontaneously generate cash? I don't think so...
[theatre is a spectator sport, too]
So, first of all, we asked the question "How do I become a spectator?"
This is what we came up with in the workshop:
--seek to be entertained
--observe technical choices, blocking, use of scenery, telling of the story
--relate in some way to what you're seeing
--notice the specific choices made, and also consider other possible choices
Phew! So that is the difference between the "Average Joe" who goes to see a show, and the informed spectator, who watches actively and takes note of details, like an IB theatre student. During my time in this course I will never again dose off by the end of the second act. Even if I'm watching a show I deem to be horrific, I have to think about why it is horrific, and how it could be better.
I did my best to be an attentive spectator while seeing the shows in New York, and I think I gained a lot from it. I learned how small details impact the overall show, and how to consider different paths a director could have taken, and how they may have impacted the show. I've also learned to work backwards from "that show was great" to why and how it was great. For example, I was thinking during the entire time I saw Dzieci's Makbet, and noticed elements such as the use of space, lighting, characterization, and music. My personal responses after the show were "Wow!", "How did they pull this off?", "Where did they learn those crazy rituals?", and "I can't believe they did that in this tiny space!". Then I thought about the way he actors were arranged onstage and how they moved to best use the space, for example. Basically, my process went from having a reaction to the show, and then explaining it. Also, I was still left with questions about Makbet even after the workshop and discussions we had in class, so I moved towards applied research online. I researched Grotowski, his theories, and physical theatre as a documented earlier. This helped me rationalize some of my emotional responses to the show.
What I learned about myself as a theatre student is that I have the capacity to learn a lot about theatre from the shows I see. What it takes is paying close attention to details, asking questions, and then following up on research after the show.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.