Journal on our vision project on "Lysistrata"

27 Sept. 2011

An insight on the intended outcome and the process of creation

In theater, having a vision is fundamental for the development of any type of performance since it is the “vehicle” that will guide your process of creation. Thus, the vision is what a director starts with– the vision is the intangible interpretation a director has of the play, which will then take a concrete form. Yet, without this initial idea or ‘formless hunch’, the creative process lacks direction.

The stimulus we were given to create a vision from was the last part of the last scene of Aristophanes’ “Lysistrata”, Myrrhine’s seduction. The challenge of the given task consisted on making this part of Aristophanes’ play our own by developing a unique vision that would communicate something relevant to us. This was not an easy task, because we already knew the playwright’s vision and that of many directors that had already staged “Lysistrata”. So this in some sense blocked us at first; we had to think of something that would give a twist and new meaning to the traditional versions. Subsequently, we decided to present a vision that would make sense to us in our own historical/cultural context. In that way we would be able to explore the scene from a personal perspective and comprehend it more in-depth. I believe that it is key to be able to connect with any piece you are creating, either from a personal, cultural or social stand. Henceforth, we changed the style of the piece from a theatrical performance to a film version and the historical context of the play from a war in Greece to a war in Peru.

“Lysistrata” was originally performed in Athens in 411 B.C. Although the themes presented were vanguard for the time and are still current, the setting and general context of the play is distant from us. Despite the fact that the war between Sparta and Athens is relevant to our education, it has no real value in our cultural and historical context – we have no emotional attachment to that war. On the other hand, the war between Peru and Chile, from the late 19^th century, has more importance to us; it happened in the country we were born in (or reside in, in Pedro’s case) not in a remote land we have never been to. This is why we chose to situate our version of “Lysistrata” in Peru. This is more relevant to our reality and, thus, not only can we relate more in-depth to it, but also can the audience. Through the change of the historical background I discovered the richness of the themes that Aristophanes portrays through his play; these are universal and timeless themes. This shows how theater around the world can influence us and relate to us, despite of the different historical periods. Sex and the inequality of the sexes is still a controversial topic nowadays. Although we have made significant advances with women rights, Peru is still a patriarchal society to some extend, especially in provinces. Therefore, it was suitable to transport “Lysistrata” to a ‘modern’ version, called “Maria” in Tacna, Peru The setting changed and the Greek names of the characters were replaced by typical Peruvian names; yet the essence of the play remained.

Our overall idea was to stay true to the core meaning of the play, but to give it our signature. I believe that we achieved this by making our version socially and historically relevant to us. We took advantage of what we had learned about Aristotle’s poetics to highlight what we were looking to express. Foremost we aimed to communicate what we considered the most important theme of the play to us – how women can manipulate men through their understanding of their sensuality and power. To do so we decided to tone down the sexual allusions and the explicit presentations of sex in the play. While versions of “Lysistrata” use elements as nudity and elongated penises to highlight the power of sex, our version aimed to accentuate the power of women instead. Our version puts emphasis on the verbal and physical actions of the Maria (Lysistrata) that made her intellectually superior. Both her eloquent speech and her physicality portrayed her strength, in contrast to the vulnerability of men, shown through their brief and chopped speech as well as their drooped appearance. So, in our version sexuality was simply a tool that women took advantage of because they understood the power they could have by using it.

Additionally, we wanted to keep it a satire that ridiculed men and their ironic debility for women. The scene we were given particularly showed this contrast between men and women – Lysistrata was in control of the Spartans and Athenians. We put emphasis on this by highlighting the “climax” of our scene. To decide what the climax of our scene was we broke it up using Aristotle’s poetics; this was helpful to decide which sections of our scene were the most relevant to our vision. Definitely, the turning point of the scene (when Peace enters naked and both troops obey Lysistrata) communicated the theme we were looking to portray the best. The link below is a referential video I used to help develop my vision of this key scene. The video shows the entrance of Peace as prominent happening – here they use lighting and levels to show it. Using this this video as a guide I proposed to include a sense of suspense and importance to this part of the scene.  In this version they do it through the flicking of lights and the descend of the actress interpreting Peace. We used the same idea of creating tension, by proposing that Paz (Peace) enters with a transparent tunic – to generate expectancy and intrigue– and that then she takes it off slowing, revealing only parts of her body to the audience who understand that she is naked by the facial expressions of the men. 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSBnzwwZ4-g

Another decision we made was to make our version a film version. After the presentation I noticed that this was not the most optimal choice, because this is a theater arts course after all. Nonetheless, our vision could still suit a theatrical performance. I will still discuss why we chose to adapt “Lysistrata” into a hypothetical movie to defend our decision, although I realize now that it was not necessary to make a film version. Going with our desire to make it our own and to modernize it we chose to shape our vision into a movie. Nowadays movies are more popular than theatrical performance and, therefore, our intention was to make it as appealing to the audience as possible. Also, we wanted to take advantage of the close-ups that can be used with film. Since we wanted to show sensuality, instead of sexuality and provide the audience with a less explicit ‘performance’, we decided to use close-ups to insinuate elements as Peace’s nudity by showing only some body parts and the expressions of the men.

A reflection on working as team

            It was challenging to work with a group in creating a vision, because we all had different ideas and readings of the play and our scene. For me theater is a very intimate process at first. Even though I know that ensemble work is key to the success of a production, when I create a vision I prefer to start on my own and then get together with the rest in my group. This is because I first have to explore what I understand from the scene or performance. Usually when I have to create a vision, I first start with incoherent and elusive ideas that I have to make sense of on my own, to then share them. I get like images in my head of colors, setting and movements that would fit with the given stimulus or scene, but at first they only make sense to me. Although this task was straightforward in comparison to other processes of creation in which one is given a broad incentive to work from, it was difficult for me to get a clear vision without experiencing the internal process of chaos first.

            Still, I think that overall we were able to combine our personal vision on this last scene to create a vision that made sense to whole group. 




Video of the presentation:

Class notes

Class notes 

08 Aug. 2011

Greek theater 

Dionysus: the god of whine and drama.

Greek mythology --> theater plays were stories rooted in truth. 

500 B.C - Tragedy 

200 years later comedy was born 

Aristotle's poetics 

Definition according to him: 

"(...) imitation of an action that is serious, complete and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action, not narrative (...)" 

For him, the most important genre was tragedy, since it was a catharsis. 

The Poetics

Imitation of action (mimesis)according to "the law of probability or necessity"

It's about the drama (not the narrative) 

History (specific) versus Drama (universal)

Six parts of tragedy:

Plot

Characters

Diction

Thoughts

Spectacle 

Melody 

Plot was the most important element in a play, according to Aristotle. 

-first principle

-the arrangement 

-a whole

-beginning, middle and end

Image 1. Perfect plot 

Example, 

        he believed that "Oedipus, the king" (Sofocles) was a perfect tragedy. 

Class notes

12 September 2011

Dramaturgy 101

Dramaturgy 101

Study of the play from a literary and performance point of view à social, political, cultural and historical contexts of play’s world.

“Multidimensional understanding”

Share what he/she learns

“Historical, critical, literacy and philosophical consciousness”

A dramaturg is a “watchdog” or “keeper of the text”, according to Proehl

The phrase that describes the work of a dramaturge, according to Bly, is “I question.”

Learns about a play’s text and its context.

Having a set procedure to follow is helpful and essential for beginners in the process of dramaturgy

Having a set procedure to follow is helpful and essential for beginners in the process of dramaturgy

Pre-production preparation à since the director has a particular view on the play and its world, it is vital for the dramaturg to “support and illuminate this vision through research and participation in the rehearsal process”

Tips:

1. Do initial readings à analysis of the text to obtain its essence and what needs to be researched.
2. Create a glossary à find key, intricate or confusing words to have them as a guide to start researching.
3. Research the background of the play à the historical period in which the play is set to communicate the pertinent societal concerns of people living in that era and place. The historical background is important because it provides the actors and the production with a context for the world.
4. Review materials that reflect the world of the play à examples are the art, music and customs of the time. Music and images that convey the mood and theme of the play. Maps, photographs, video, magazines, etc.
5. Organize your research for presentation à it is important to be concise, direct and to narrow down your research to note the most significant and relevant parts of the investigation that will contribute to the understanding and development of the play.

Response to text read:

After reading this article I became aware that the dramaturg’s role is vital to the creation of a play. It is his/ her job to inform the director, actors and production about the historical background of the play, what elements of the play represent, such as silence in “Waiting for Godot” and how the character are influenced by the time period. The job of a dramaturg is to question the text and interpret through a historical, philosophical and social scope. Although they should not intervene in the vision of the director or tell the actors what to do, he/she explains the why behind a scene, a phrase and the setting of the play. Context is relevant in anything we do and most of all in theater because it provides the actors and audience with a comprehension of space, a mood and an overall tone of the scenes. Context sets you in a place, time and moment. Without it one cannot develop a character in depth, because the actor would lack the awareness of their space and the world they live in. Setting and important facts of the time (including culture, society and politics) provide actors with material to enrich their interpretation. When they understand where they come from and where they are, they can create a sense of where they are going and why they are there.

     Without a doubt, dramaturgs are an essential piece in a play, since they provide the actors, director and production with valuable information that they can use to create. The creation process is not possible without material to work with. What dramaturgs give is the raw material that the directors mold and forge into the product.

Quotes about dramaturgy:

"In short, the Dramaturg is primarily
responsible for the dramatic and literary, as opposed to the
theatrical aspects of the theatre."

DRAMATURGY AND THE TEXT: "There used to be a time, as with the
Sacred, when we could go back to the Book and check our interpre-
tation.  The Text was the inseminating source to which we were to show fidelity, line perfect, deferring to the Author as if he
were God the Father."

 "I believe that the basic requirement for all rehearsal work (...) is primarily a kind of doubting process . . . a doubting and questioning of the theatrical means and also of the traditional themes."

DRAMATURGY AND LOVE: "A script comes in at my theatre, and I'm
the first one who is apt to fall in love with it. . . .  [S]ometimes there's no director for that play yet.  Okay now, I may not choose the director, but the fact is, once it goes into production I have had the longest relationship with that play of anybody at that theatre."


 

About me

My name is

Alessa

 I am passionate, charismatic,

Stubborn, a perfectionist …

RANDOM FACTS ABOUT ME. I recently cut my hair; nobody thought I’d dare because I’ve had it the same since I was in kinder. I didn’t think so either, but it was exciting. (I didn’t think that I’d put this in my theater journal either) I have two fathers and six grandparents. When I was four I knew the capitals of every country in the world. I love skiing. I am in the process of writing a book about the experience of my grandfather, as a Jewish, during WWII. I have written 50 pages and want to continue, but I cannot find time to do it. Instead of a diary I have a box in which I store loose paper with my feelings, thoughts and concerns written on them. Inside the box there are rose petals, love letters, chocolate wrappers, photos, notes…  My passion in performing I have done it since I was in my mother’s womb – she would put headphones around her swollen belly and I would move; according to her I was dancing. Acting for me is like breathing. I need it. It is a catharsis A way to be someone else, understand different points of views… I always said I wanted to be a performer… at first I wanted to be like Shakira. I used to dress up and dance in every family reunion or act. Then I was too embarrassed.

Monologue: a witness of oppression during WWII

The following monologue is based on an interview I did to my grandfather, José, a Jew survivor of World War II. I chose his experience because I find it moving and sincere. Even though the monologue shows a small act of oppression, its significance is broader – the character's statement alludes to the violation of human rights during World War II and in any war or massacre. The soldier in this monologue represents the power of the oppressor, as opposed to frailty of the victim. This contrasting roles and the abuse of power is not only true in this case, but also in any case of oppression. I believe that a monologue about the violation of human rights is a powerful way to communicate the themes of abuse, indifference and injustice. These theatrical pieces give voice to the victims and, also, the by-standers. Additionally, they are a form of catharsis for these people who are condemned to silence by their oppressors.  

In relation of the play we are studying in Theater Arts, "Lysistrata" this monologue also gives voice to the point of view that usually does not have the right to talk. Victims, either of patriarchies, wars or bullying, are those who remain quiet in the dark. Theater allows them to speak and protest or simply share their perspective to raise awareness or cause a reaction from the audience. Like the women in "Lysistrata", Jozef is also a victim of injustice. Dissimilar to Aristophane's style, however, this monologue has a grave and dramatic tone. 

Jozef: It is September 21st of 1939: the Germans attacked Poland twenty days ago. Bombs have invaded the blue skies and the tension created by this uncertain war is tangible. We are not save anymore, threat is our shadow, and I am beginning to think we will never be save again. I don’t feel free in the streets anymore; the thought of their eyes watching me as I pace punctures my skull. They have invaded us – our streets, our thoughts, our rights… we belong to them.

Today I had to go out; my mom asked me to visit my grandfather. Near the patio I bumped into a German soldier and an old Jewish man. The soldier was yanking the frail man by his white beard. He threw him to the floor and spit on him. The somber and resigned look on the old man’s face paralyzed my muscles; I just stood there and I watched as the German soldier amused himself with the suffering of a Jewish. He got his bayonet and attempted to cut his beard with the bayonet. The fury in his eyes and the ferocity of his movements made me shiver. He continued moving the bayonet against the man’s beard back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. (Pause)

You cannot cut a beard with a bayonet.

(Pause)

The soldier placed his boot on the old man’s face and pressed it against the floor the way you step on a filthy cockroach.

The soldier gazed at the insect lying beneath the sole of this shoe. I gazed at the human lying beneath the apathy of oppression… And I could only think, he could’ve been my grandfather.