|
|
Last Reply:
RE: Can't put it down
By: ,
Mar 24 2008, 1:49 PM EDT
I've now finished Guskin. What I said last Thursday is pretty much what I feel now. The big idea, that is, to 'take words off the page' (or notes off a musical score) and bring them into being by verbalising without analysing to work out what sort of character might say them, is very much in tune with the way we have been working. It is quite close to the 'brainfart' technique, which is sometimes used in preparing and teaching music. This big idea is really worth working with, both as individuals and in rehearsal and it can only enhance our work.
There are a few nagging doubts, one about Guskin's self-acclaim which I mentioned previously, which goes along with the star-testimony that goes to make the book thicker than I needed it to be. More, I was troubled that there is almost nothing about the 'target'. At Factory, we have always worked on the principle that everything we say or do is in order to change something else. We have not been concerned with our own performance, nor the way in which we say our lines - our aim is that our words bring about change. Perhaps in carrying Guskin work forward, we should see to what extent his big idea can work for our 'change the target' approach.
My other nag involves music. On p172, Guskin says, "...listening to the music of a given period is crucial preparation for specific roles, like being exposed to the air people breathed in that time and place. If you want to act the characters of Shakespeare, Molière, Checkov and Ibsen, you must have John Dowling, Lully, Chopin, Mussorgsky, Schubert and Schumann and Beethoven in your ear, in your soul." Not only does my instinct ring warning bells about this sentence, (what has Chopin got to do with Checkov?) but if I am to believe all he says about things of which I know little, like film and TV, I am not encouraged that a man who claims to have John "Dowling" in his soul, can't get his name right. J'ox
out of
found this valuable.
Do you find this valuable?
|