Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Investigation into differing vocal reactions of young actors to a text Nicholls, Hilary 1972

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1972_A8 N52.pdf [ 11.97MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093278.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093278-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093278-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093278-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093278-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093278-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093278-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093278-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093278.ris

Full Text

INVESTIGATION INTO DIFFERING VOCAL REACTIONS OF YOUNG ACTORS TO A TEXT by HILARY NICHOLLS B.A.3 U n i v e r s i t y of B r i s t o l , 19^9 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of THEATRE We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the re q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1972. In present ing th is thes is in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements fo r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that, the L i b r a r y sha l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e for reference and study. I fu r ther agree that permission for extensive copying o f th is t h e s i s for s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h is representa t ives . It i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of th is thes is f o r f i n a n c i a l gain sha l l not be allowed without my wr i t ten permiss ion . Department of The Un ive rs i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada i i ABSTRACT A universally observed problem in acting i s the i n a b i l i t y of some actors i n some roles to sound convincing when they speak. Instead, they sound as i f they were reading aloud, although they have already learned their lines. This deficiency i s usually referred to as a •reading 1 or •liney' quality in vocal delivery. A kindred fau l t , common in more experienced actors, i s f a l l i n g into exaggerated modulations seldom met with off stage; this i s vulgarly known as •ham1. When these faults are present in a performance, the audience has a powerful Impression of inauthen-t i c i t y or untruth. In a satisfactory performance, the voice sounds spontaneous and free, conveying the truth of the character. The object of the project described in this thesis was to investigate these phenomena more c r i t i c a l l y , with the aim of discovering possible causes other than innate talent or i t s absence in the actor. The method adopted in this pilot study involved observation of a small group of volunteer students, whose vocal delivery In different acting exercises could be assessed and compared. The project, which lasted for a Winter session, was set up somewhat similarly to an acting course. The students were given various acting exercises including concentration exercises, Sound and Movement, improvisations, oral readings, and work on one act of a play, necessitating a rehearsal period of four-and-a-half weeks. Potentially significant passages i n some of these exercises were i i i recorded on cassette tapes: these tapes appear as appendices to the present thesis. Voices were compared in a l l the situations provided by the different exercises, but the basic contrast lay between the same voice using improvised words, and using words invented by another. Each student was assessed i n these groups of exercises. In the oral readings and the study of the play they were considered under different headings, some of which dealt with technical proficiency, while others were concerned with imagination i n the creation of a role, and the resulting success or failure i n projecting a charac-ter; the assessment l a i d emphasis on the quality of the vocal delivery. Three causes were found to be significant in examining an unsatisfactory delivery. The f i r s t of these was connected with resistance to playing a particular kind of part. In two eases, a character i n a play appeared to threaten the actor, possibly by i t s destructiveness and violence. In these cases the actors res-ponded with unconvincing voices and a marked tendency to adopt a set of inflections which became unalterable, and thus quite un-spontaneous. The second cause lay i n a fundamental attitude to the text as such. A text apparently constituted Itself as an authority for some actors, an external authority whose power they were unable to transfer to themselves. This created a 'reading* quality in the voice and a similar lack of spontaneity. The third significant area concerned the use of the imagination i n building up a role. Where the actor had failed to ask himself the question, "What would I do i f I were in this situation?" there was a thinness in the presentation of the character, which showed i n iv under- or over-emphasis i n the voiee. Furthermore, where the techniques for enabling an actor to believe in his role as a specific character were ignored, the actor tended to approach the emotional demands of the part with a direct attack; discouraging results ensued. This lack of imaginative preparation manifested i t s e l f in an exaggerated and strained delivery. Finally, there are some comments on feeling, intuition and i n t e l l e c t , and how these bear on the problems of student actors, who have been trained i n other disciplines to use their brains f i r s t and foremost, and their intuitions rather less. V Table of Contents page I n t r o d u c t i o n 1 Chapter 1. The P r o j e c t and i t s Broblems and the Work of The F i r s t Term 9 The Students Who Took P a r t i n the P r o j e c t . . 12 The P o s i t i o n of the I n v e s t i g a t o r Ik The A u d i t i o n s 16 Work Done i n the F i r s t Term 21 Sound and Movement 21 I m p r o v i s a t i o n . . 25 Scenes From P l a y s 30 Chapter 2. Work Done i n the Second Term ^3 O r a l Readings kk The Sport of My Mad Mother. Act I *+8 I n d i v i d u a l A c t o r s , Whose -work i s Studied i n the next chapter 51 Chapter 3. Work of the P r i n c i p a l Actors i n the P r o j e c t . . . 56 Sound and Movement and Improvisations . . . . 56 The Two O r a l Readings 66 A Note on the Use of the Tapes f o r Readings . 68 Rob's O r a l Reading 6.9 Jan's O r a l Reading . . 72 D a n i e l ' s O r a l Reading 75 The Sport of My Mad Mother 80 Cast of The Sport of My Mad Mother 82 Note on Use of Tapes f o r the Play 82 Rob as Fak 83 -Jan as P a t t y . . 89 D a n i e l as Cone 9^ Note on Use of Tapes recording Mike and Dan i n the P l a y 101 Dan as Steve 102 Mike as Dean 10^ Summary 108 Chapter k. Conclusion 116 •I don't want t o be a b i t c h / b a s t a r d . " . . . . 11.6 The Text and A u t h o r i t y 120 B e l i e f and U n b e l i e f 121 F e e l i n g and Spontaneity I£7 B i b l i o g r a p h y vi Table of Contents (cont'd.) Appendices; page Appendix A Interviews With Five Members of The Cast of The Sport of My Mad Mother 131 Appendix B Texts Used f o r the Auditions 165 Appendix C Auditions 172 Appendix D Texts of Passages read i n the F i r s t Oral Readings . . . 191 Texts of Passages read i n the Second Oral  Reading 195 Appendix E Act I of The Sport of My Mad Mother . . . . . 202 1 Introduction What happens -when an actor contronts a text? Why do people so often, when using words not their own, sound unreal or exag-gerated or even meaningless, whereas in ordinary l i f e they can converse and say what they mean with clear communication? Why does the voice behave more naturally and predictably when we improvise? What comes between the actor and convincing utterance, particularly in the early stages of his career? Although, as an actor gets older, he may find that there are many things he can do with his voice, yet he may s t i l l block off meaning and direct communication. This i s usually recognisable by other actors and the more alert members of an audience. In fact, the problem i s both obvious and far-reaching, and has been explored i n many ways from Stanislavski onwards. Yet i t crops up for everyone in t r a i n -ing for the stage, and has to be confronted by each generation. But because i t i s obvious i t i s often ignored. In order to discover some answers, or at least to isolate the phenomena and describe them, a project was set up which became the laboratory work for this thesis. Eight students were kind enough to volunteer for i t , and the work i s narrated in detail in the next two chapters. I have drawn also on my own experience of acting, and of teaching drama i n High School. The task was to find out what l i e s behind an unnatural and 'liney 1 delivery of a text, and the contrast between this and ordinary speech or improvisation. It was noticeable that one or two actors in plays I had directed, as well as those who took part in the project, had made real progress towards an unforced delivery of lines, while ;.the ma3ority. remained stuck with an awkward 'reading* quality, and often with a set of inflections that remained unalterable* Any attempt to jolt the actor out of this r i g i d , chosen group of sounds met with strong though unconscious opposition. Even i f an actor, at a rehearsal, was directed i n such a way that he began to f e e l something, or to approach a stale unit in a fresh way so that something new began to happen, i n spite of this, the old, r i g i d pattern would return and assert i t s e l f at the next rehearsal, and the director was faced with the choice of starting again or settling for cliche. Actors, especially those who want to become professional, naturally become aware of their vocal problems early on in their careers, particularly their technical problems. Some-times the sound of their own voice begins to Ir r i t a t e . And yet the way out of the unnatural sounds, wrongly placed emphases, phoney cadences, i s not clear. And this can continue on into profession-a l l i f e . There are surprising examples of this. A f i l m was made of the Abbey Theatre (Dublin) production o£ The Playboy of the  Western World 1 with the Iris h actress Siobhan McKenna playing Pegeen Mike, a character she projected with great conviction as far as gesture, movement and physical intensity went. It was a truthful portrayal of Synge's heroine. So what went wrong? Why did one f e e l dissatisfied? Somehow the text had not been assimi-lated. I t i s a d i f f i c u l t one from the actor*s viewpoint, since i t i s written i n a heightened, often l y r i c a l , prose, f u l l of references to natural beauty, such as most English-speaking people do not use -^ The Plavboy of the Western World by J. M. Synge, screen play by Brian Burst, directed by Brian Hurst, Janus Films, 1963. 3 i n conversation. (Synge claimed that Ir i s h peasants did speak l i k e that, and that he had listened to them through cracks i n floorboards.) Apparently in order to overcome these d i f f i c u l t i e s , the actress spoke in a curious f l a t chant, and at other times, with intense and inflated cadences. Pegeen i s a character invested with strong and elemental feelings; these were blocked by the voice, though not by the body. The synthesis of voice, character and bodily action had not taken place, although the performance was potentially excellent. Another example of a sense of strain with a text i s to be found in Laurence Harvey's narration of the Mystery play, The 2 Flood . If Laurence Harvey were not already well-known, both as an actor of classical roles, and as a movie star, his performance in this recording would be less surprising. A l l that the text requires i s t e l l i n g the story. The actor evidently feels that this i s not enough, and embellishes his task with a l l kinds of vocal decoration; an over-precision with consonants, a t h r i l l i n g undertone of intensity, and a drawing out of vowel sounds. These vocal flourishes cannot be performed without considerable and well-developed s k i l l i n vocal technique. This i s not the temptation of the young actors to whom attention has already been drawn, but i t i s related to their d i f f i c u l t i e s . These two professional actors have been mentioned because they epitomize what can happen to the problem at a later stage of development. One could say, then, that there are two phases. In the f i r s t , the voice w i l l not obey the w i l l of the actor, and the text i s expressed with monotony, emphases are wrongly placed; there are ^he Flood with music by Igor Stravinsky, Columbia Records Stereo M9 6357, 1962. hesitations, muttering or shouting or a tendency to get fixed In an Immovable set of inflections. There i s also the beginning of the tendency to acquire a special •stage* voice. This i s hard to pinpoint, as i t differs with different people. But when that voice i s used, the listener always knows that the actor i s using words that are not his own. His everyday voice i s switched off. There i s the later phase, when the more elementary, problems have been overcome, but the tendency to get stuck in a fixed set of inflections remains, though taking a rather more subtle form, and the special * stage* voice i s well-developed. It i s , on the whole, the f i r s t phase that was studied in the project. Stanislavski has some pertinent comments i n a chapter called Faith and Sense of Truth: This sense (of truth) must penetrate and check everything that the actor does and the spectator sees. Every l i t t l e exercise, whether internal or external, must be done under i t s supervision and approval.-* He stressed that an actor must possess both a sense of truth and i t s opposite: a sense of what Is false. In working on the project, the question was: how to raise this sense of awareness i n relation to the voice. How do actors know when they sound untruthful, or without meaning or intention? Perhaps they do know, but f e e l unable to do anything about i t because they cannot pinpoint the obstacle that i s coming between themselves and the text. In any case, an actor i s not a wandering voice, and i t could reasonably be argued that vocal d i f f i c u l t i e s are only part 3 ' •> • Stanislavski, Constantin, An Actor Prepares. Theatre Art Books, New York, 197P9 p. 1?2. of a much larger whole, which i s the use of the actor's body as the total instrument of his art. The obstacles that Impede the whole physique from expressing the character implicit i n a given text provoked Stanislavski to an all-out attack on them, the result of which i s well-known. His solutions have found an enormous response among actors on this continent as well as i n Europe (though much less in the professional organization of the theatre). He showed how i t was possible both to assume the mask or persona of another, and at the same time to feel the approp-riate emotions of that character. He does not disregard the necessity of technical equipment (witness his views on this i n his k second book) but the methods he advocates for truthful acting are primarily psychological and involve the whole person: body, voice, mind and the silent monitor within. It i s , therefore, somewhat a r t i f i c i a l to separate the voice from the rest; the subject under consideration could not be extracted and studied i n total i s o l a -tion. Other aspects of acting were thus taken into account as well, and are looked at in detail also. But i t was the applica-tion of Stanislavski*s 'sense of truth' to the voice that was the focal point. (It i s worth noting i n parenthesis, however, that many actors do have d i f f i c u l t i e s i n one area rather than another. Stanislavski, while relating the story of his own prob-lems, lays more stress on his physical tension and clenched 5 muscles than on vocal strain . So i t i s not wholly a r t i f i c i a l to concentrate on this particular aspect.) k ^Stanislavski, Constantin, Building A Character. Theatre Arts Books, New York, 19k9. 5 Stanislavski, Constantln, My Life In Art. Meridian Books, The World Publishing Co., Cleveland and New York, 19%, pp. 169-171. 6 Since the a c t o r s working on the p r o j e c t were mostly i n -experienced, a question arose as t o whether the v o c a l problems under o b s e r v a t i o J ^ e r e a r e s u l t of t h e i r l a c k of t e c h n i c a l pro-f i c i e n c y . Was there a connection between an i n a b i l i t y t o p r o j e c t the voice c l e a r l y , and producing u n n a t u r a l or i n s i n c e r e speech? I t d i d not seem t o f o l l o w n e c e s s a r i l y . Everyone on stage must ob v i o u s l y know how t o p r o j e c t h i s v o i c e . But the a b i l i t y t o do t h i s i s not a guarantee of anything e l s e . Everyone who has been a member of an audience has had the experience at some time of hearing a b e a u t i f u l l y produced voic e r i n g i n g w i t h i n s i n c e r i t y . I f an a c t o r speaks without c o n v i c t i o n at a moment where the t e x t c a l l s f o r deeply f e l t emotion, the r e s u l t i s more ob j e c t i o n a b l e than the b l u r r i n g of a l i n e where there i s profound f e e l i n g . (Gf.'the performance of N i c o l Williamson as Hamlet, where h i s t e r r o r on seeing h i s f a t h e r ' s ghost was so g r e a t , some l i n e s were l o s t through s h i v e r i n g and stammering. F r e d e r i c k Valk's O t h e l l o o became s l i g h t l y i n a u d i b l e during h i s rage of remorse a f t e r the death of Desdemona. The rage expressed I t s e l f i n a spasmodic way t h a t r e c a l l e d the e a r l i e r f i t or s e i z u r e i n the presence of Iago i n Act IV Sc. 1.) S i n c e , t h e r e f o r e , I t i s p o s s i b l e f o r a r t i f i c i a l i t y t o e x i s t s i d e by s i d e w i t h t e c h n i c a l p r o f i c i e n c y , the work of the p r o j e c t was not aimed at the removal of t e c h n i c a l f a u l t s as such, unless these e i t h e r Impeded s e r i o u s l y the expression of meaning ( l i k e °Film of Hamlet. d i r e c t e d by Tony Richardson, produced by N e l l H a r t l e y , Columbia P i c t u r e s , 1969. 7o-thello. d i r e c t e d by J u l i u s G e l l n e r , Old V i c , London, 19^2. ft " O t h e l l o . Act V, Sc. 11, e s p e c i a l l y l i n e s 276-280. 7 inaudibility) or seemed to arise from something more than a mere lack of technique. For example, an actor's voice may sound strained or inaudible because he has not arrived at the truth of what he i s doing. He has no conviction about i t so he drops (or raises) his voice to hide the fact. If speaking on stage i s a kind of action, an actor, particularly an Inexperienced one, may not be able to make his vocal gesture effective i f he has no belief. He w i l l be heard i n a l i t e r a l sense, but his intention w i l l not be conveyed. The stage actor, unlike the movie actor, always has to be aware that he i s speaking to a lot of people i n a large place. This necessitates the powerful projection of the voice in situa-tions where i t would be natural, in everyday l i f e , to speak gently. In the theatre, Othello has an easier time (vocally) 9 when he wishes to be 'washed in steep-down gulfs of liquid f i r e ' 10 than do Gwendolen and Cicely when they talk over the tea-cups. Which i s another way of saying that since Zola, Antoine, Ibsen and the whole r e a l i s t i c school, the theatre makes demands which i n a more declamatory and verse-speaking age i t did not — the de-mand that an actor looks as i f he i s talking quietly and easily when he must at the same time be audible at the back of the gallery. There are great masters of this art. John Gielgud comes to mind at once. This additional factor affects the actors much less in a small theatre, and i t was never consciously worked on in the project. It i s mentioned here only in answer to a probable Q ^Shakespeare, Othello. Act V, Sc. 11, i . 279. 1 0Wilde, Oscar, The Importance of Being Earnest, Act 11, in Plays. Prose Writings and Poems. J. M. Dent, London, I960. 8 query from a reader. Out of the a c t o r s -whose work i s considered i n d e t a i l here, only one might have had se r i o u s problems of a u d i b i l i t y i n a l a r g e r t h e a t r e . The questions behind the work were not p r i m a r i l y , t h e r e f o r e , of a t e c h n i c a l k i n d . They touched on more s u b j e c t i v e areas of Imagination, b e l i e f and r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h o t h e r s . For example, why i s the voic e u s u a l l y more n a t u r a l and simple i n im p r o v i s a -t i o n s than when speaking the words of a t e x t ? I s i t e a s i e r t o b e l i e v e i n an improvised s i t u a t i o n than one a r i s i n g from a p r i n t e d t e x t ? How much does b e l i e f i n a s i t u a t i o n have t o do w i t h v o c a l problems? Does an o b j e c t i v e of the ki n d elaborated by S t a n i s l a v s k i 1 1 help people t o speak without a reading q u a l i t y or stage voice? Do people react t o the t e x t i t s e l f e m o t i o n a l l y , f o r example w i t h f e a r , h o s t i l i t y , submissiveness or r e b e l l i o n ? What stops commitment or b e l i e f i n a given stage s i t u a t i o n ? Developments i n the work were suggestive, and such c o n c l u -s i o n s as were reached are t o be found i n the l a s t chapter. They are not d e f i n i t i v e and are i n c l u d e d t o show some l i n e s t h a t might be f o l l o w e d up i n work on t h i s area of a c t i n g . S t a n i s l a v s k i , An Actor Prepares, p. 105. 9 Chapter 1. The Project and i t s Problems, and the Work of the F i r s t T e r m ~ Not a l l the questions asked at the end of the Introduction had neatly posed themselves before the vork began. Some arose during the process of working. One assumption, however, was made, a very simple one: that any vocal p e c u l i a r i t y - unnaturalness, wrong emphasis, 'reading 1 q u a l i t y or I n s i n c e r i t y - had a cause, or a v a r i e t y of causes. I t might be d i f f i c u l t to a r r i v e at the cause, but i t existed. I t was not by accident that an actor would improvise with a natural voice and easy manner and yet become vo c a l l y strained and p h y s i c a l l y wooden when faced with a text. Out of t h i s assumption, then, the questions arose. And i n order to f i n d , or at l e a s t search f o r , answers, a project was devised which required the cooperation of a small number of students, w i l l i n g to work on i t f o r one academic year. The students would undertake d i f f e r e n t kinds of acting exercise, and conclude with the performance of a play. Their responses to these d i f f e r i n g situations would be noted, and where sui t a b l e , recorded on tape. There was an element of t r i a l and error In establishing the exercises and other material. I wanted to e s t a b l i s h a set of acting exercises that had some sort of i n t e r i o r development and which also necessitated contrasting ways of using the voice. Three groups of a c t i v i t i e s were eventually decided upon. In the f i r s t , the use of non-verbal noises was the most Important element i n the exercise, known as Sound and Movement; t h i s exercise has already been established as a u s e f u l t o o l f o r drama students. The second group involved the use of improvisations necessitating the use of words. The l a s t group required working 10 w i t h t e x t s , s p e c i f i c a l l y scenes from p l a y s , and a l s o o r a l readings of short passages taken from d i f f e r i n g kinds of l i t e r a t u r e . The c o n t r a s t s between these three modes of expression were always c l e a r e r than the l i k e n e s s e s . I n o r d i n a r y l i f e a person does not t i c k l i k e a c l o c k or growl l i k e a bear, as the students d i d i n the Sound and Movement; on the other hand he may scream or grunt or groan, and these are a l l human n o i s e s , though animals may make them too. So t h i s f i r s t e x e r c i s e v a r i e d between human and non-human sounds. There was a l i t t l e h e s i t a t i o n or h i a t u s before the non-human could be assumed - a pause f o r an e f f o r t t o imagine what i t i s l i k e t o be a horse and neigh. No s i m i l a r e f f o r t was r e q u i r e d t o shout. T h i s i s a human response known t o everyone. A group of p r i m i t i v e noises a l s o emerged, i n t e n s e l y rhythmic, l i k e drumming - Bim-bam. bim-bam. bim-bam. The human noi s e s l i k e shouting were, of course, nearer t o speech than the p r i m i t i v e and non-human, because language i s a d i s t i n c t i v e l y human accomplishment. The n a r r a t i v e type of im-p r o v i s a t i o n s t h a t were done next, moved near t o conversation and o f t e n turned i n t o i t , sometimes w i t h a q u i t e extensive e x p l o r a t i o n of a di s p u t e or d i s c u s s i o n . I t r e q u i r e d a higher degree of s k i l l and education than the previous e x e r c i s e , but a l s o l e s s d i s i n h i b i -t l o n . The t h i r d stage brought about an even greater c o n t r a s t w i t h the previous ones. I t was a much bigger step i n t o s o p h i s t i c a t i o n i n human a c t i v i t y . Animals o n l y act under compulsion from men, and then not very w e l l . The wonder i s tha t they do i t at a l l . The step that the a c t o r has t o t a k e , i s i n t o the mind of another person, the mind of the p l a y w r i g h t , and i t r e q u i r e s a profound 11 d e c i s i o n on the part of the a c t o r t o do t h a t , u s i n g whatever means he can t o help him. These three groups of a c t i v i t i e s , then, formed a basis on which t o compare and c o n t r a s t the v o c a l prob-lems of the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the p r o j e c t . I n the f i r s t term these e x e r c i s e s were so arranged that the students began w i t h the Sound and Movement e x e r c i s e s , and then moved on i n t o I m p r o v i s a t i o n s , mostly of a n a r r a t i v e k i n d . (At the same time some limbering-up e x e r c i s e s were a l s o undertaken, which were u s u a l l y s i l e n t and not d i r e c t l y r e l e v a n t t o the t h e s i s . They were undertaken r a t h e r as a i d s t o the work than as the work i t s e l f . The students had a p a r t i c u l a r I n t e r e s t i n the Trust e x e r c i s e s 1 t h a t some of them had p r e v i o u s l y experienced. We t r i e d a few of these and t h e i r comments are recorded.) Short scenes from p l a y s completed the work of the f i r s t term. During the next term, the focus s h i f t e d t o the use of t e x t s : the students undertook two set s of o r a l readings, and rehearsed f o r 2 a performance of the f i r s t act of The Sport of My Mad Mother . These r e h e a r s a l s l a s t e d four-and-a-half weeks. F i n a l l y , I asked each of the p a r t i c i p a n t s a set of questions ranging over t h e i r 3 i n d i v i d u a l response t o d i f f e r e n t aspects of the p r o j e c t . ^Two examples of Trust e x e r c i s e s which were undertaken: a) Two students stand f a c e - t o - f a c e and put t h e i r hands to g e t h e r , palm t o palm. Without r e l e a s i n g the hands they explore the space a v a i l a b l e i n the area immediately surrounding them. b) Groups of three students. One of them l e t s h i m s e l f r e l a x and f a l l s f l a t from a standing p o s i t i o n . The other two catch him t o prevent him from h i t t i n g the f l o o r . 2 Ann J e l l i c o e , The Snort of My Mad Mother. Faber and Faber, London, 196k. 3 See Appendix A, p. 131 12 The work: should not be considered as d i v i d e d bet-ween two terms j w i t h the im p r o v i s a t i o n s and other forms of spontaneous expres s i o n i n the f i r s t , and the work on t e x t s i n the second, though there was a greater emphasis on the t e x t i n t h a t term. We continued t o improvise r i g h t through the p r o j e c t , and t o use im-p r o v i s a t i o n a l techniques as an a i d t o r e h e a r s a l s . We had a l s o used t e x t s i n a sm a l l way during the f i r s t term. The r e a l d i v i s i o n f e l l between words made up spontaneously by the students, and words made up by another, and w r i t t e n down. Bearing i n mind t h i s d i f f e r e n c e between the spontaneous and the w r i t t e n word, I l i s t e n e d many times t o the voices of the same group of people i n performing d i f f e r e n t v o c a l e x e r c i s e s . During the second term, I tape-recorded v a r i o u s stages of the work so t h a t I could l i s t e n w i t h greater accuracy t o , and gain a f i r m e r impression o f , the problems and successes. The tapes are appended t o the t h e s i s and i n c l u d e an i m p r o v i s a t i o n , the two o r a l readings, three stages of rehear s i n g the p l a y w i t h i n d i v i d u a l speeches from i t , and i n t e r -views w i t h each student. T h i s should a l s o help the reader t o c l a r i f y the v o c a l q u a l i t y of each a c t o r , and t o v e r i f y p o i n t s made about i n d i v i d u a l s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the t h i r d chapter where the work of the p r i n c i p a l a c t o r s i s considered i n d e t a i l . The Students Who Took P a r t i n the P r o j e c t A u d i t i o n s were h e l d i n order t o choose the p a r t i c i p a n t s and seventeen people presented themselves. From these, e i g h t were chosen. T h e i r names were Anne, Rob, D a n i e l , Jan, Jeanine, Mike, Dan, and G i l l i a n ( J i l l ) . The students saw the p r o j e c t as a mini-course i n drama. They 13 •were not t o l d what s p e c i f i c area -was under observation i n case t h i s should create s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s about t h e i r voice or u t t e r a n c e , and so i n t e r f e r e -with the i n f o r m a t i o n . They were a l l f i r s t year students except two. I n d i v i d u a l a t t i t u d e s t o the p r o j e c t v a r i e d . Rob, who had more experience i n drama than anyone e l s e , regarded i t as a method of g a i n i n g a c t i n g experience and l e a r n i n g from i t . Anne was a l s o s e r i o u s l y i n t e r e s t e d i n a c t i n g , and l i k e Rob, had some thoughts about becoming p r o f e s s i o n a l . Jan, who was not concerned about a career as an a c t r e s s , was nonetheless pleased t o have an oppor-t u n i t y t o act and t o become i n v o l v e d w i t h a p l a y and t o l e a r n more about t h e a t r e . Jeanine saw i t more as a simple opportunity t o a c t , which was her main i n t e r e s t . She, t o o , had been c o n s i d e r i n g the stage as a c a r e e r , and was more I n t e r e s t e d i n t h e a t r e than i n the U n i v e r s i t y . D a n i e l a l s o wanted a c t i n g experience, and was concerned as w e l l t o f i n d out more about plays and t h e i r s t r u c t u r e . Dan ( t o be d i s t i n g u i s h e d from D a n i e l ) had some not c l e a r l y formulated hopes of a p r o f e s s i o n a l career. He regarded the p r o j e c t as an extension of h i s a c t i n g experiences at s c h o o l . Mike, who was a t h i r d year student, had not thought of a career on stage but saw the p r o j e c t as a means of d i s c o v e r i n g what a c t i n g was l i k e , whether he could act and would want t o pursue i t f u r t h e r . J i l l , who was a l s o a t h i r d year student, had become i n t e r e s t e d i n a c t i n g through the drama course she had already begun i n the Theatre Department. She had no previous a c t i n g experience, so t h a t f o r her and Mike the p r o j e c t was a step i n a new d i r e c t i o n . Ik. The P o s i t i o n of the I n v e s t i g a t o r From the s t a r t my own r o l e i n the p r o j e c t seemed confused. On the one hand there was the p o s i t i o n of a teacher undertaking what, t o the students at l e a s t , appeared t o be a drama course. On the other, there was the r o l e of the observer, t a k i n g notes and rec o r d i n g what was happening,, and e v e n t u a l l y drawing conclusions from i t . One r o l e was a c t i v e , r e q u i r i n g i n i t i a t i v e , the other more pa s s i v e , r e q u i r i n g r e c e p t i v i t y . I n r e h e a r s a l , the two r o l e s might come i n t o c o n f l i c t , the passive g i v i n g way t o the a c t i v e . The r e h e a r s a l i t s e l f , I was a f r a i d , might begin t o f u n c t i o n i n two d i f f e r e n t ways: i t would serve i t s normal f u n c t i o n as the prepar a t i o n time f o r the performance - i t s back r e g i o n , t o use the h term of E r v i n e Goffman , but i t would a l s o have t o f u n c t i o n i n an unusual way as an end i n i t s e l f . I t would, i n t h i s second func-t i o n , become the place where development or non-development was observed and recorded and where any example of the problems per-t a i n i n g t o the t h e s i s would be i n v e s t i g a t e d . The a c t o r s would probably remain ignorant of t h i s second f u n c t i o n , but the i n v e s -t i g a t o r would have t o be anything but ignorant. The double purpose of the r e h e a r s a l would have t o be held c o n s t a n t l y i n mind. I took t h i s problem t o Dr. Martin Meissner, a member of the Sociology Department, and he showed how the p o s i t i o n could be d e f i n e d , and how i n p r a c t i s e i t would be l e s s complicated than i t might seem i n p r e p a r a t i o n , since the students would r e l a t e t o me i n a r o l e already f a m i l i a r , namely th a t of teacher. I t was more Irvine Goffman, The P r e s e n t a t i o n of S e l f i n Everyday L i f e , Doubleday Anchor Books, Garden C i t y , New York, 1959. 15 important t o ask the r i g h t questions as the observer of the -work, than t o worry about the p o s i t i o n . The aim of the p r o j e c t -was t o obtain^uncontaminated i n f o r m a t i o n . I n the event t h i s turned out t o be broadly c o r r e c t , though there was some degree of t e n s i o n at times between the two r o l e s . This arose p r i n c i p a l l y where the r o l e of observer became neglected f o r the immediate demands of d i r e c t i n g the p l a y , and i n s u f f i c i e n t n o t i c e was taken of the problems p e c u l i a r t o the p r o j e c t of the t h e s i s . However, I do not t h i n k I could c l a i m t o be completely s u c c e s s f u l i n o b t a i n i n g uncontaminated i n f o r m a t i o n . Where a p a r t i c u l a r v o c a l weakness became obvious, i t was not always p o s s i b l e t o say that i t was due t o t h i s cause r a t h e r than t h a t , though sometimes a p a r t i c u l a r cause would appear very suggestive. To r u l e out a l l p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e causes would have re q u i r e d a kind of t o t a l knowledge about the act o r that was both unobtainable and u n d e s i r a b l e . S t a t i s t i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n of the type where one group of answers t o questions i s compared w i t h another or other s , was not p o s s i b l e , as t h i s would have n e c e s s i t a t e d working over a much longer period w i t h successive groups of d i f f e r e n t students. The most important c o n s i d e r a t i o n was t o ensure that the questions I wanted t o ask were not l e a d i n g ones, and that the student should be l e f t as f r e e as p o s s i b l e t o form h i s own judg-ments about h i s own problems, and about the m a t e r i a l used i n the p r o j e c t . T his would apply e s p e c i a l l y t o the questions asked before and a f t e r the a u d i t i o n s , and i n the in t e r v i e w s when the 5 work was concluded. I t was a l s o important, as has already been See Appendix A, p. 131. 16 acted, not to reveal the area of concern In case this conditioned the students to become unduly conscious of their voice, with undesirable results, such as listening to themselves, or trying to bring themselves into line with an imagined coneept of what they thought the thesis was about. It was eventually found that simple, rather obvious questions evoked the most Interesting and Informative answers, though there were some d i f f i c u l t i e s with individuals who found i t hard and unfamiliar to evaluate their own experience i n words. The Auditions These were set up i n the usual way, based on a search for people of acting a b i l i t y . Care was taken, however, to look out for some examples of the 'reading 1 quality problem. Each audition lasted about half an hour, and each individual was auditioned twice. There was a gap of about five days between the two auditions. The reason for this was to highlight the vocal response to the text. This response became clearer i n the second audition. A further consideration was to allow sufficient time for a proper study of the text, and to see how much effort the student was prepared to put into working for the second audition. No one but the student and myself was present during the auditions unless someone extra was needed to read a part i n dialogue. Questions were asked before and after the f i r s t audi-tion, and after the second one. Every effort was made to establish an informal and non-threatening atmosphere. Auditions vary enor-mously in this respect and depend a great deal on the attitude of the person conducting them. I f he or she i s nervous or tense, t h i s w i l l be communicated t o the a c t o r s t r y i n g out f o r the p a r t . I f the a c t o r i s inexperienced, he may stumble or make s l i p s t h a t would not occur i f the environment were more f r i e n d l y . Sometimes an even more unusual event may r e s u l t : the a c t o r , f e e l i n g under s t r a i n , may give an e x c e l l e n t performance of an a c t o r g i v i n g an a u d i t i o n . He presents himself i n two parts simultaneously, the one he i s p l a y i n g i n the a u d i t i o n , and a p r o j e c t i o n of himself as an a c t o r a u d i t i o n i n g . This leads t o an i n d i r e c t and unconvincing c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h the t e x t . Some people w i l l do t h i s anyway, e i t h e r through some i n s t i n c t f o r a c t i n g on a l l occasions, whether on stage or o f f , or because they are always nervous at a u d i t i o n s even where the atmosphere i s q u i t e encouraging; i t i s hard to assess t h e i r t a l e n t u n t i l they are working d i r e c t l y on a p a r t . T h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n a l s o l e d t o the s e t t i n g up of f a i r l y long a u d i t i o n s . By a l l o w i n g s u f f i c i e n t time f o r the student t o get absorbed i n the t e x t , e s p e c i a l l y at the second a u d i t i o n , i t was hoped that he would f o r g e t any nervous f e e l i n g s he might have and become concerned w i t h the demands of the p l a y w r i g h t . The playwrights i n q u e s t i o n , Shakespeare and Thornton W i l d e r , were chosen f o r c o n t r a s t . There were i n f a c t s e v e r a l c o n t r a s t s ; those r e l e v a n t t o the a u d i t i o n were between verse and prose, period s t y l e and modern s t y l e , f o r m a l i t y and i n f o r m a l i t y , a p u b l i c manner and a p r i v a t e manner. There were a l s o contrasted charac-t e r s : George and the Stage Manager (Our Town) . and Brutus i n J u l i u s Caesar; Emily i n Our Town and Constance i n King John. 'Thornton W i l d e r , Three P l a y s . Harper Bros., New York, 1957* 18 Our Town was -written i n a recent though not a completely modern idiom, and i t s sentence s t r u c t u r e i s c o l l o q u i a l and simple. With regard t o the male students, the t e x t was chosen w i t h another con-s i d e r a t i o n i n mind, namely that the Stage Manager has t o address the audience d i r e c t l y , i n casual and inf o r m a l speech. (This was a l s o t r u e of two characters i n the play I had begun t o t h i n k of f o r performance at the end of the p r o j e c t . ) This was a f u r t h e r extension of the problem of unspontaneous speech: would the ' l i n e y ' d e l i v e r y a l s o manifest i t s e l f when a student actor addressed an audience d i r e c t l y ? The two Shakespeare speeches, though w r i t t e n i n an u n f a m i l i a r idiom, were not hard t o understand, e i t h e r grammatically or emo t i o n a l l y . One other contrast seemed important — Constance and Brutus are both i n a more a u t h o r i t a t i v e and commanding p o s i t i o n , p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y , than Emily or George. I t could be u s e f u l f o r c a s t i n g purposes t o see .which of these p o s i t i o n s was e a s i e r f o r each a c t o r t o assume. 7 The t e x t s , then, were: Our Town, by Thornton Wilder. The men read the Stage Manager's speech on p. 70, who throughout the. play e x p l a i n s the developing events i n the town, and what happens as time passes. He acts as compere t o the show. They a l s o read George i n the scene which f o l l o w s , where he i s confused by the bewildering behaviour of Emily. The g i r l s read E m i l y , who i s t r y i n g , i n t h i s scene, t o e x t r a c t from George, not very h a p p i l y , some i n d i c a t i o n of h i s Typescript of the t e x t s i s t o be found i n Appendix B on p. 165. 19 f e e l i n g f o r her. •Julius Caesar. The men read Brutus' speech, i n which he j u s t i f i e s the p o l i t i c a l murder of Caesar. King John. The g i r l s read a speech of Constance, where she r e a c t s w i t h anger, s u s p i c i o n and s e l f - p i t y , t o some bad news which a f f e c t s her son's p o l i t i c a l f u t u r e . As I have s a i d , the students were not chosen because of v o c a l s k i l l s as such, although the p r o j e c t was concerned p r i m a r i l y w i t h the v o i c e . The choice was determined, as i t u s u a l l y i s , by the a b i l i t y t o communicate w i t h the whole person, t o make some, kind 8 of impact. For example, i n Da n i e l ' s a u d i t i o n , a u d i b i l i t y was not continuous. His voice was very s o f t i n any case, yet he managed t o give the impression of the c h a r a c t e r s , though on a small s c a l e . Would he be able t o overcome t h i s i n a u d i b i l i t y ? Would he become more d i s t i n c t when (or i f ) he was p r o j e c t i n g the character he was p l a y i n g on a l a r g e r s c a l e . Did t h i s depend on knowing l i n e s ? Would he be more audible i n an improv i s a t i o n ? Was the i n a u d i b i l i t y due t o the a u d i t i o n s i t u a t i o n ? As w e l l as t h i s quietness on Da n i e l ' s p a r t , there were some - 9 10 examples of a 'reading' or ' l i n e y ' q u a l i t y : Dan and Jan both showed an i n t e l l i g e n t grasp of the characters t h a t they were por-t r a y i n g , but both i n the second a u d i t i o n d i s p l a y e d a marked l a c k o Appendix C, p. 172. This appendix gives an i n d i v i d u a l account of each student's a u d i t i o n , from notes taken at the time. 9 I b i d , p. 187. l°Ibid, p. 176. 20 of spontaneity. Anne 1 1 had a connected tendency, though not quite 12 similar, to use a special stage voice. Hob showed some tendency to shout or overact. His vocal d i f f i c u l t i e s were more li k e those of experienced actors, i.e. there was no problem with voice production but from time to time a phoney and insincere inflection crept into his tones. Mike's1-^ lack of experience and therefore of confidence was somewhat similar to Daniel's, although he was much more audible. His voice was level and monotonous, especially at the f i r s t audition, where his reading was forced and unnatural; physically he seemed relaxed and he moved easily. He approached the text intellectually. J i l l gave a more intuitive and vivid rendering at the f i r s t audition than the second, when too much thought seemed to create a block to spontaneity. She had a voice i s of unusual quality and a wide range of tone. Jeanine y had a strong audible voice. As Constance she was vocally too slight, though she made a good attempt at Emily, and conveyed the freshness of the character. A 'liney' quality was not apparent. These eight students participated in the work of the f i r s t term. Jeanine and Anne both l e f t the project after this for d i f -ferent reasons, and the remainder, in the following term, recorded two oral readings and took part in the f i r s t act of The Sport of  Mv Mad Mother. Anne returned briefly to take part in the oral readings. ^ I b i d , p. 1B3. 1 2 I b i d , p. I 7 3 . 1 3 I b l d , p. i 78. llfAppendix C. p. IB5T. i s i b i d , P . m. 21 Work Done In the F i r s t Term  Sound and Movement Thi s e x e r c i s e met w i t h p o s i t i v e response from everyone. The i n t e n t i o n i n i t i a l l y was t o see how e a s i l y (or not) the students would produce non-verbal noises w i t h accompanying gestures, what they would make of them, and whether the kind of problem t h a t can suddenly show up when a t e x t i s being read or rehearsed would manifest i t s e l f i n t h i s e x e r c i s e as w e l l , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the area of responding t o , and g i v i n g t o , o t h e r s . Would the sounds emerge i n a h a l f - h e a r t e d , u n f i n i s h e d way? For i n t h i s s o r t of e x e r c i s e there i s only success or f a i l u r e and nothing i n between, presumably because there i s no t e x t or i m p r o v i s a t i o n a l n a r r a t i v e t o r e i y on. I t would a l s o be i n s t r u c t i v e t o see how q u i c k l y and e x a c t l y they could p i c k up the sound and movement from each other - a point t h a t w i l l become c l e a r e r when the e x e r c i s e has been d e s c r i b e d , and whether the sound o f f e r e d would be accepted or r e s i s t e d . The e x e r c i s e was taught t o the group by a Vancouver a c t r e s s , Helen Bouvier, who had i n t u r n learned i t from a theatre group i n C a l i f o r n i a , who used i t f r e q u e n t l y as a pre«rehearsal warm-up. The students i n the p r o j e c t learned i t at the same time t h a t we began the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s , and we o f t e n used i t as a method f o r l e a d i n g i n t o them. I n t h i s e x e r c i s e , the group began as a s m a l l , t i g h t c i r c l e facing'Outward. They began t o chant on a s i n g l e note f o r a few seconds, then they sang the ascending s c a l e from that note, w i t h i n c r e a s i n g energy, at the same time walking outward. They turned 22 round when they reached the top of the octave, so that they were then formed into a large c i r c l e facing inward. Someone (anyone) st a r t s to make a sound with an accompanying movement; the sound can be anything except an actual word, and i t does not have to be vocal or human, though t h i s i s more usual. He repeats the sound a few times then passes i t to someone else i n the c i r c l e whom he f i x e s with his eye. That person repeats, as pr e c i s e l y as he can, the sound and movement that was sent to him; then he changes i t a l i t t l e , so that i t i s sim i l a r to, but not i d e n t i c a l with, the sound and movement he received. Then, i n turn, he transmits the new one, which again i s picked up, s l i g h t l y altered and sent on. This continues u n t i l someone gets t i r e d of i t . When t h i s happens, that person accepts the sound and movement sent to him and repeats i t a few times, as before, but changes i t into what he f e e l s i s i t s d i r e c t opposite. This i s c a l l e d the move int o counterpoint. I t i s carried on u n t i l the group wants to f i n i s h the exercise, or the action comes to a natural conclusion. This conclusion seems to come about l i k e the accepted end of a dance when the music stops. Por example, one of the men led away a heavily breathing horse on one occasion, the man supplying both the movement of leading away and the breathing. Normally i t i s desirable that each person maintains h i s pos i t i o n i n the c i r c l e , as movement towards another, or int o the middle, creates a break i n the pattern of the c i r c l e , and concentration drops. Some students were i n c l i n e d at f i r s t to be noisy and aggres-sive when working on t h i s exercise, while others responded to t h i s by becoming victimized; the rest tended to d r i f t into one or other of these two a t t i t u d e s . This set a monotonous tone, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the counterpoint when loud tones would simply f o l l o w low tones. I n order t o get away from these two moods, and t o gain greater v a r i a t i o n , we decided t o e l i m i n a t e the expression of aggression or v i c t i m i z a t i o n , and then see what would happen. This l e d t o an increase of inventiveness on everyone's p a r t , and they began t o experiment w i t h non-emotional sounds, l i k e e a t i n g bubble-gum. Some people t r i e d out v a r i o u s kind of mime, as w e l l as the a b s t r a c t noises and movements of machinery. People i m i t a t e d such t h i n g s as the pendulum of a c l o c k , or the handling of a heavy, viscous sub-stance. T h i s e x e r c i s e was found t o have s e v e r a l b e n e f i t s , but i t was i n a d v i s a b l e t o l e t i t go on f o r a long time as i t took up a good d e a l of energy. The comments of the students can be found i n t h e i r i n t e r v i e w s 1 ^ . - I t helped them t o become a l e r t , and a l s o speeded up thought and i n i t i a t i v e and put them i n touch w i t h each other. I t worked best when the speed was kept t o a vigorous l e v e l . I t has many p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r the ima g i n a t i o n , since the sounds could range over a v a r i e t y of c a t e g o r i e s : animal, b i r d , machinery, human, as w e l l as phenomena l i k e wind or sea sounds. I t worked q u i t e w e l l as an i n t r o d u c t o r y t o m a t e r i a l f o r The Sport of My Mad  Mother, since t h i s play was f u l l of n o i s e s , v e r b a l and non-verbal» and nonsense, as w e l l as s i n g i n g and movement. Helen Bouvier s a i d t h a t the aim of the e x e r c i s e was t o create a group out of a set of i n d i v i d u a l s , who would be mutually support t i v e and would a c q u i r e , through p r a c t i s e , a knowledge of each other' c a p a b i l i t i e s . To some extent i t had t h a t e f f e c t . But I was more See Appendix A, p. 131 i n t e r e s t e d i n the questions t h a t began t o a r i s e as the e x e r c i s e got under way. Was i t r e a l l y as much a group a c t i v i t y as Helen f e l t ? Didn't the onus of response f a l l h e a v i l y on the i n d i v i d u a l as, i n a p l a y , the onus f a l l s on the i n d i v i d u a l a c t o r s whose i n t e r -r e l a t i o n s h i p make up the a c t i o n of the whole? I n t h i s way i t was a d i f f e r e n t type of e x e r c i s e a l t o g e t h e r from the s o - c a l l e d Trust e x e r c i s e s which do not r e q u i r e i n d i v i d u a l s k i l l as such. As i n a p l a y , a l s o , t h i s e x e r c i s e r e q u i r e d a mixture of l e t t l n g - g o and c o n t r o l , p o s s i b l y a higher degree of d i s i n h i b i t i o n than most plays r e q u i r e . Do people mind u t t e r i n g g i b b e r i s h ? Are they embarrassed by i t ? Was i t r e a l l y g i b b e r i s h , anyway, or were they making sense through i t ? I s t h i s k i n d of noise utterance a descent i n t o chaos and non-communication, as at the end of Ionesco 1s 17 f r i g h t e n i n g p l a y , Jacques, ou l a Soumission? Some answers were forthcoming at once. 0 b v l o u s l y they d i d not mind u t t e r i n g g i b b e r i s h , nor was i t embarrassing, unless a p a r t i c u l a r sound was p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t t o i m i t a t e . The sounds were never completely meaningless. An attempt t o com-municate something commonly known and recognizable underlay them. I t was n e a r l y always p o s s i b l e t o t e l l what i t was. The e x e r c i s e d i d not descend i n t o chaos, mostly because of the t i g h t s i t u a t i o n of the c i r c l e and the r u l e t h a t kept the p a r t i c i p a n t s confined t o the same spot. On the whole, these spontaneous and unpro-grammed sounds came without e f f o r t , e s p e c i a l l y when a c e r t a i n technique had been acqu i r e d . I t became something of a pa r t y game, a more s o p h i s t i c a t e d one than might appear on the s u r f a c e , and •^Eugene Ionesco, Four P l a y s , t r a n s l a t e d by Donald A l l e n , Grove Press I n c . , New York, 1958. although at times they r e s o r t e d t o animal n o i s e s , i t r e q u i r e d human observation t o do t h i s s u c c e s s f u l l y . Most of the students found i t very much e a s i e r t o make excursions i n t o the no n s e n s i c a l and b i z a r r e , than t o read aloud a s e r i e s of short passages i n the o r a l r e a d i n g , as they d i d l a t e r . Some problems d i d a r i s e , though, t h a t a l s o occurred l a t e r and i n other circumstances. A student would r e s i s t a sound and movement, when apparently he found i t a l i e n , t h a t i s when I t was something he would not have thought of i n i t i a t i n g h i m s e l f . I n t h i s case i t would f a l l f l a t , and be poo r l y passed on t o the next p a r t i c i p a n t . There was sometimes a p e r i o d of g e t t i n g i n t o a p a r t i c u l a r sound and movement where i t was p o s s i b l e t o observe a kind of tr a n s f e r e n c e of a u t h o r i t y t a k i n g place: the r e c i p i e n t of the sound s l i g h t l y r e s i s t e d the outside a u t h o r i t y of the g i v e r of the sound, u n t i l he had t r a n s f e r r e d the power r i g h t i n t o h i s own ima g i n a t i o n , so t h a t the noise was now h i s own. This would appear, i n r e t r o s p e c t , t o connect w i t h the r e s i s t a n c e t o a t e x t and the a u t h o r i t y of the w r i t e r , which was discovered i n another 18 context • But i n general the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h i s e x e r c i s e had l i t t l e d i f f i c u l t y i n producing a v a r i e t y of sounds w i t h c o n s i d e r -able energy and spontaneity. Improvisations The i m p r o v i s a t i o n s were undertaken i n order t o l i s t e n t o any d i f f e r e n c e s i n v o c a l q u a l i t y between t h i s form of expression and working w i t h a t e x t , whether reading aloud or rehearsing a p l a y . l^See Chapter 3SPP» (ok~l°bi Was the v o c a l q u a l i t y i n an i m p r o v i s a t i o n more or l e s s spontaneous and sincere? D i d i t have a greater c l a r i t y of d i c t i o n or meaning? D i d a student ever sound f o r c e d or phoney w h i l e improvising? D i d the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s sound l i k e normal conversation? Did the improvised speech convey the f e e l i n g r e q u i r e d by the s i t u a t i o n ? There were roughly two types of i m p r o v i s a t i o n , though they o c c a s i o n a l l y overlapped. The f i r s t group n e c e s s i t a t e d an inward-t u r n i n g a t t i t u d e , concentrating the mind upon an imagined object or s i t u a t i o n - handling t h i n g s , l o o k i n g at p i c t u r e s i n an A r t G a l l e r y , or at a r t e f a c t s i n a museum, us i n g a hammer and n a i l s , or p a i n t i n g a w a l l . They were mostly done as pr e p a r a t i o n f o r the next group, i n the hope t h a t they would enable the student t o f e e l q u i e t e r i n s i d e and t h e r e f o r e f r e e r t o express himself i n the more outward-turning, and v o c a l l y more demanding e x e r c i s e s t h a t were t o f o l l o w . A few of the Trust e x e r c i s e s were included at t h i s p o i n t , p a r t l y because the students had a p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t i n them. T h e i r comments on these are i n c l u d e d i n t h e i r i n t e r v i e w s . The second group of e x e r c i s e s , which brought about much more group i n t e r - a c t l o n , Involved the use of language. They began w i t h simple e f f e c t s l i k e c a l l i n g out t o a t t r a c t someone's a t t e n -t i o n , f o r c i n g someone t o l i s t e n who i s bored or i m p a t i e n t , t e l l i n g someone what you intend t o do, and t h a t you won't take 'No' f o r an answer. I n the e a r l y stages these i m p r o v i s a t i o n s were f r e q u e n t l y done i n p a i r s , and the students invented s i t u a t i o n s themselves. We moved on i n t o l a r g e r group i m p r o v i s a t i o n s which n e c e s s i t a t e d some t a l k from everybody — sometimes r a t h e r s p o r a d i c , as i n a peaceful and happy s i t u a t i o n , or n o i s y and r a p i d as i n an e x c i t i n g or alarming scene. While work was being done on these i m p r o v i s a t i o n s which 27 involved the use of t a l k and c o n v e r sation, i t was noted t h a t two d i f f e r e n t kinds of demand were being made upon the student: i n one type of i m p r o v i s a t i o n he was performing as h i m s e l f , w i t h others a l s o performing as themselves, and u s i n g the kind of l a n g -uage that he was accustomed t o use i n everyday l i f e ; w h i l e i n the second kind he was performing a d e f i n i t e c h a r a c t e r , other than h i m s e l f , w i t h others who were doing the same, and u s i n g conver-s a t i o n that d i d not belong t o t h e i r everyday l i f e . The f i r s t k i n d r e q u i r e s the player's normal s o c i a l sense, and h i s own r e s -ponse to the environment, even i f i t i s one t h a t he has not en-countered i n h i s o r d i n a r y l i f e . The r o l e of everyday l i f e i s needed, and t h e r e f o r e the voice of everyday, though t h i s i s a somewhat o v e r - s i m p l i f i e d view of what a c t u a l l y happens. The a c t o r , i n f a c t , becomes himself at p l a y , — " I am not r e a l l y cooking bacon over a campfire. I am p l a y i n g at being myself cooking bacon over a campfire." And t h i s i s not d i f f i c u l t , be-cause we are much more used t o performing r o l e s i n everyday l i f e than we are t o the a r t of mimesis. I t was noted, i n t h i s type of i m p r o v i s a t i o n , t h a t the voices of the students sounded the same as they d i d when they were t a l k i n g t o each other before or a f t e r a r e h e a r s a l . There was no a r t i f i c i a l i t y or odd i n f l e c t i o n s , and they were r a r e l y g r a v e l l e d f o r l a c k of matter. This d i d occa-s i o n a l l y happen when they ran out of arguments i n a d i s p u t e , but then t h a t happens i n r e a l l i f e t o o . Sometimes a l a c k of c o n v i c -t i o n at the beginning of a scene would cause the f l o w t o stop t e m p o r a r i l y . The second type i s much harder. Suddenly a player has t o 28 become a weighty f a t h e r or a middle-aged aunt. Response t o others has t o be i n c h a r a c t e r , the voice modified and adapted t o s p e c i f i -c a t i o n s of age and d i s t i n c t i v e t r a i t s . F e e l i n g s have t o be those appropriate t o such a person. The rhythm of movement tha t the part r e q u i r e s may be q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from one's own rhythm, and so on. The students were not u n n a t u r a l l y more at ease w i t h the f i r s t type of i m p r o v i s a t i o n , and generated a l o t of spontaneous f e e l i n g . I n t h i s simple s o r t of n a r r a t i v e no demands were made except emotional response and a c e r t a i n amount of quick-wittedness; they could laugh e a s i l y and form casual r e l a t i o n s h i p s , p a r t i c u l a r l y where the group was l a r g e . They enjoyed some s i t u a t i o n s very much, such as sharing a student commune and planning Christmas, or drawing together against the complaints of a l a n d l o r d , or sharing a summer c a b i n . Such s e t t i n g s generated new ideas or events and i n d i v i d u a l s would give l i t t l e t w i s t s t o the s t o r y or mood. U s u a l l y there was a f l o w of easy speech, u n l e s s , as has been noted, any l a c k of c o n v i c t i o n crept i n . The e f f e c t of i m p r o v i s i n g i n character was at times l i b e r a -t i n g ; t h a t i s , i t r e l e a s e d at times a v i v i d t a l e n t f o r impersona-t i o n . Sometimes a student might go f u r t h e r than t h i s and explore the character i n more s u b t l e ways. At other times the e f f e c t of t a k i n g on a r o l e would l i m i t the response. A student would look awkward and become s i l e n t i n the p a r t , or look f o r t h i n g s t o say i n a conscious way. N a r r a t i v e i m p r o v i s a t i o n s w i t h broadly funny characters u s u a l l y went w e l l . An i m p r o v i s a t i o n based on the s t o r y of C i n d e r e l l a was done; the Ugly S i s t e r s and the Father and Mother were performed e n e r g e t i c a l l y , almost v i o l e n t l y and -with con-s i d e r a b l e inventiveness of speech i n the case of the Ugly S i s t e r s . But the P r i n c e and C i n d e r e l l a were o f t e n stuck f o r words, and i t was c l e a r l y harder t o be a good, ' n i c e ' person and keep going at t h i s , than t o q u a r r e l f e r o c i o u s l y , or f l i r t outrageously w i t h the P r i n c e , as the S i s t e r s d i d . The voices of the ' n i c e 1 sank almost out of he a r i n g . A melodrama was undertaken t o o , i n which everyone had parts which avoided ' n i c e n e s s 1 , i n c l u d i n g the hero and heroine. I t was done In i m i t a t i o n of e a r l y movie melodrama, where the t r a i t s of a l l the c h a r a c t e r s , t h e i r gestures and speech, were exaggerated, f a t h e r , mother, hero, heroine, and v i l l a i n and v i l l a i n ' s f r i e n d . The i m i t a t i o n occurred spontaneous-l y — no one had suggested the movie v e r s i o n as a model. Here there was no v o c a l problem or d r y i n g Up. This r a i s e d questions t o o , questions of b e l i e f . I t was not the melodramatic s i t u a t i o n t h a t was believed i n ; perhaps b e l i e f i s a misleading word at t h i s p o i n t . I t was a j o i n t l y experienced pleasure i n sending up what was phony, e s p e c i a l l y r o l e p l a y i n g . Looking back at the questions asked at the beginning of t h i s s e c t i o n , I d i d not hear i n s i n c e r i t y i n the voice as long as the s i t u a t i o n c a r r i e d c o n v i c t i o n . But there was q u i t e o f t e n a l o s s of v e r b a l c l a r i t y p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the scenes where the students were not p l a y i n g parts i n c h a r a c t e r . They took on so many aspects of everyday l i f e t h a t the volume o f t e n dropped t o t h a t r e q u i r e d by a small room, where people know each other w e l l and communicate by other means than the v o i c e . I n t h i s way, they o f t e n sounded completely n a t u r a l but without the p r o j e c t i o n necessary f o r an auditorium. A sense of s t r a i n was apparent at times i n the im p r o v i s a t i o n s which r e q u i r e d the p l a y i n g of d e f i n i t e p a r t s ; s i t u a t i o n s seemed f o r c e d , e s p e c i a l l y w i t h those who played ' n i c e 1 or ' s t r a i g h t ' p a r t s . They r a n out of words or looked embarrassed. Again t h i s appeared t o be due t o l a c k of c o n v i c t i o n , not so much about the s e t t i n g , but about who they were. The i m p r o v i s a t i o n t h a t we tape-recorded r e q u i r e d the students t o play d e f i n i t e p a r t s , but the pa r t s were w i t h i n f a i r l y easy range. They were supposed t o be student members of an P.L.Q. c e l l i n Montreal, under s u s p i c i o n of c o n s p i r i n g against the government. I n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r i m p r o v i s a t i o n there were no problems of b e l i e f , and they created and sustained an atmosphere of t e n s i o n , f e a r and ragged nerves, t h a t communicated w i t h con-v i c t i o n , and the speech of a l l members of the group conveyed the f e e l i n g appropriate t o the s e t t i n g . .Scenes From P l a y s These scenes were a l l chosen and d i r e c t e d by the students themselves. I t was the f i r s t time, apart from the a u d i t i o n s , t h a t they had worked w i t h a w r i t t e n t e x t . The scenes l a s t e d about t e n t o f i f t e e n minutes, and were a l l d i a l o g u e s . I went t o one r e h e a r s a l and saw the f i n a l v e r s i o n , and they a l l saw each other's work and o f f e r e d comment. I t was important t o note a l l the problems th a t arose In reh e a r s i n g these short scenes, and not t o narrow down the research merely t o l o o k i n g f o r the way i n which the words were spoken. What f o l l o w s i s an account which inc l u d e s the observations made at the time, and the students' own 31 comment on t h e i r work. Excerpt From The Rainmaker, by N. Rich a r d Nash 1^ Rob and Anne Thi s p l a y i s w r i t t e n i n a somewhat l y r i c a l s t y l e , p a r t i c u l a r l y the speeches of the Rainmaker h i m s e l f . The scene th a t Rob and Anne chose i s one where a stronger person attempts t o persuade another t o a l t e r her most basic a t t i t u d e s t o her existence. c The man t r i e s t o shake the woman out of a depressed and subservient view of h e r s e l f ; and the means by which he e x e r c i s e s t h i s persuasion i s a very powerful command of words which c o n t r a s t s sharply w i t h her country s i m p l i c i t y and i n a r t i c u l a t e n e s s . Her r e a c t i o n t o him i s a mixture of r e s i s t a n c e and a t t r a c t i o n . The t e x t was not w e l l - d i g e s t e d by e i t h e r of the a c t o r s . Rob's voice showed a marked 'stagey* q u a l i t y which was i n co n t r a s t w i t h h i s work i n the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s . I n the I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h i s t h e s i s , two phases of an u n n a t u r a l d e l i v e r y of l i n e s were noted: the f i r s t phase, where the a c t o r i s l e s s competent e x h i b i t i n g i t s e l f i n a »reading* q u a l i t y ; and the second phase, where he has learned t o use h i s v o i c e w i t h s k i l l , but i n a decorated, un-r e a l i s t i c way. Rob had advanced a l i t t l e i n t o t h i s second phase, the only person i n the group who had. As f a r as one could t e l l , he was only l i k e l y t o f a l l i n t o t h i s 'phoney' ha b i t when he was unconvinced of the s i t u a t i o n he was supposed t o be i n , or the k i n d of character he was p l a y i n g . Anne was l e s s t r o u b l e d by the ^The Rainmaker, from Twelve American P l a y s . 1920-1960, ed. by Richa r d K. C o r b i n , Charles S c r i b n e r ' s Sons, New York, 19o9. 32 t e x t i n t h i s way, p o s s i b l y because the s t y l e of her l i n e s was l e s s ornate and e l a b o r a t e , and the sentences were s h o r t e r . This r a i s e d an important point i n the t o t a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n of a 'reading* or 'stagey 1 q u a l i t y . I t may be harder t o avoid t h i s q u a l i t y i n some plays than i n o t h e r s , and i n f a c t some s t y l e s of w r i t i n g may promote a ' l i n e y ' or 'ham' d e l i v e r y i n the a c t o r . Rob s a i d l a t e r t h a t he responded immediately t o the words, but what t h i s response a c t u a l l y was he d i d not make c l e a r . I t Is p o s s i b l e , w i t h a wordy and decorated t e x t , t o become m i l d l y drunk on the s t y l e . The students a l s o s a i d , though they seemed unaware of the i n c o n s i s t e n c y , t h a t they d i d not t h i n k much about the language they were u s i n g , but o n l y about the emotional p a t t e r n of the scene and i t s development. I n c o n t r a s t i n g Rob's work i n the a u d i t i o n s and l a t e r i n The Sport of My Mad Mother, w i t h h i s work i n The Rainmaker, i t was s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t i n the l a t t e r he was! much l e s s s i n c e r e and more 'stagey'. So i t i s p o s s i b l e f o r a t e x t , as w e l l as a v o i c e , t o be i n a u t h e n t i c . The d i f f e r e n c e between t e x t s at t h i s point i s not the d i f -ference between a l i t e r a r y , p e r i o d s t y l e (though t h i s may pose t e c h n i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s f o r the a c t o r ) and a contemporary i d i o m a t i c s t y l e . The r e a l c o n t r a s t i s between an author who w r i t e s w i t h t r u t h at the l e v e l of experience and i m a g i n a t i o n , and one who doesn't, who h i m s e l f gets drunk on words yet f a l l s i n t o v a r i o u s t r a p s too numerous t o e l u c i d a t e here, whose net r e s u l t i s i n a u t h e n t i c i t y . For example, any a c t r e s s who has t r i e d t o i-20 i n v e s t w i t h a u t h e n t i c i t y the l a s t speech of S t . Joan i n Shaw's Bernard Shaw, Saint Joan, Penguin Books, Middlesex, England, 1966, p. 137. p l a y , where she repudiates her r e c a n t a t i o n and by doing so faces death by f i r e , w i l l know what i t i s t o s t r u g g l e w i t h words th a t do not seem tru© t o the experience. I t may be T.|-se-'marieslre> t o suggest t h a t Shaw ever wrote I n a u t h e n t i c a l l y , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n one of h i s greatest p l a y s , but any one who examines, and s t i l l more reads aloud, these f i n a l words w i l l f i n d a curious change i n the speech. Elsewhere i n the play Joan t a l k s v i g o r o u s l y and simply, w i t h a suggestion of a r u r a l accent. At the end she i s a b r u p t l y endowed w i t h an educated and l i t e r a r y eloquence. There seems t o be no good reason f o r t h i s ; t h a t i t seemed i n performance t o r i n g t r u e , must have been due t o the g i f t s of the c r e a t o r of the r o l e , S y b i l Thorndike. The s t r u g g l e w i t h a t e x t , then, may sometimes be aggravated by the way i t i s w r i t t e n . : I n answer t o questions about how they had d i r e c t e d the scene, the two students s a i d t h a t they had shared t h i s t a s k . Anne s a i d t h a t she worked out the u n i t s of a c t i o n on paper, w h i l e Rob s a i d he was l e s s i n t e r e s t e d i n t h i s approach, and had worked more through h i s i m a g i n a t i o n , v i s u a l i z i n g the sequence of events as he studied the t e x t . They t r i e d spontaneous b l o c k i n g , but t h i s be-came d u l l and r e p e t i t i v e ; when asked whether i t would have helped w i t h the b l o c k i n g t o have a d i r e c t o r , Anne s a i d t h a t she would have p r e f e r r e d t h i s , but Rob s a i d no, he became uneasy i f someone was always t h e r e , t e l l i n g him where t o go. They i n s t i t u t e d l i n e r e h e a r s a l s i n order t o memorize. Anne s a i d t h a t i f she played a part which came t o her e a s i l y as a c h a r a c t e r , she s c a r c e l y had t o l e a r n the l i n e s a t a l l . But i f there was some d i f f i c u l t y which blocked the r e a l i z a t i o n of a c h a r a c t e r , then she always had t r o u b l e memorizing, and had t o do 3k so by repe a t i n g the words over and over. The l i n e s of t h i s p l a y came without much e f f o r t . Rob, on the other hand, had memorized h i s part by repe a t i n g the l i n e s at home. (He had, In f a c t , much longer speeches i n the scene than Anne.) I t became c l e a r , both from conversation and w i t n e s s i n g the performance, t h a t Rob had found h i s part much harder than Anne had found h e r s , and t h a t they had approached t h e i r work i n w i d e l y d i f f e r i n g ways. Anne approached the character of L i z z y with-the use of S t a n i s l a v s k i techniques. She b u i l t up her background: where she l i v e d , her d a l l y r o u t i n e , how she reacted t o other s , what her o b j e c t i v e i n l i f e was. Rob (who d i d , i n f a c t , know something of the work of S t a n i s l a v s k i and claimed t o use I t i n The Sport of My Mad Mother) s a i d t h a t he responded immediately t o the words, and what was happening i n the present i n the a c t u a l scene, and th a t he was i n t e r e s t e d i n e x p l o r i n g the use of s i l e n c e and pauses. To the s p e c t a t o r , h i s performance came over as i n s u b s t a n t i a l , because he was enjoying the wordy, romantic prose, savouring i t u n c r i t i c a l l y , without b u i l d i n g up the person who was doing a l l the t a l k i n g . He d i d not r e a l l y know who he was, or be l i e v e i n the s i t u a t i o n he was i n , and t h e r e f o r e a t h e a t r i c a l element crept i n , and he was unconsciously i m i t a t i n g the work of other a c t o r s , r a t h e r than t a k i n g a lo o k at the r e a l i t y of the p a r t . I t would have helped him t o consider the language more c r i t i c a l l y and the problems i t presented. Anne, having dug much more deeply I n t o her own imagination and experience, came up w i t h a much more s o l i d , at times, moving performance. The A p p l i c a n t , by Harold P i n t e r Jeanine and Ban Thi s i s a short sketch, complete i n about t e n minutes. I t i s a f r i g h t e n i n g scene i n which the symbolic d e s t r u c t i o n or c a s t r a t i o n of a male by a female takes p l a c e . The s e t t i n g i s the Interview of an a p p l i c a n t f o r a job. And the s t y l e i s not n a t u r a l i s t i c but d e r i v e s from the Theatre of the Absurd. The instrument of d e s t r u c t i o n I s the language: words are used by the woman w i t h i n c r e a s i n g speed and volume, coupled w i t h a s i n i s t e r piece of machinery i n which the a p p l i c a n t i s encased. The climax comes as the horror of the man mounts, ending on a ki n d of scream, and i t i s f o l l o w e d by a very s l i g h t denouement. I n conversation about the p i e c e , both Jeanine and Dan r e -s i s t e d i t s fundamental unpleasantness. Jeanine c a r r i e d her r e s i s t a n c e f u r t h e r i n the performance, r e j e c t i n g the t o t a l des-t r u c t i v e n e s s of the r o l e she was p l a y i n g . As her v i c t i m , Dan d i d not have th a t p a r t i c u l a r d i f f i c u l t y , but n e i t h e r set about the scene w i t h a c l e a r c o n v i c t i o n of the w r i t e r ' s i n t e n t i o n . They b u i l t up the speed and volume, but r a t h e r m e c h a n i s t i c a l l y . There was ho r i s i n g i n t e n s i t y of menace on the part of the persecutor, nor f e a r on the part of the persecuted; when t h e i r voices be-came powerful, they a l s o became s p e c i a l stage v o i c e s . There was no problem here of w r i t i n g as i n The Rainmaker. P i n t e r ' s dialogue was simple and d i r e c t . Why, then, the s p e c i a l stage voice ? Was t h i s v o i c e being used t o repla c e genuine f e e l i n g , 9 1 -•-The A p p l i c a n t , from A S l i g h t Ache and Other P l a y s . Methuen, London, 1961. 36 and i f soj why? A h i n t of the d i r e c t i o n i n which t o loo k f o r an answer appeared i n t a l k i n g w i t h them. I asked how they had d i r e c t e d the p l a y . Dan s a i d t h a t they had d i r e c t e d each other, and had a l s o r e l i e d i n d i v i d u a l l y on an inner i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . They had i n v i t e d Rob i n t o give them a l i t t l e e x t r a d i r e c t i o n , and he t o l d them b l u n t l y t h a t the man i n the sketch was being put through the machinery and destroyed, and t h a t the woman was doing t h i s . I t was hard t o be l i e v e t h a t they could have f a i l e d t o grasp t h i s . Dan was more i n c l i n e d t o accept t h i s view than Jeanine, who t r i e d t o i n t e r p r e t her r o l e i n a n a t u r a l i s t i c way appropriate t o a p l a y by Ibsen. She* s a i d t h a t the woman was 'a person', not neces-s a r i l y so aggressive as Rob thought. She was b u s i n e s s - l i k e , but not t o t a l l y without f e e l i n g . Dan, on the other hand, saw the scene as an i n t e r v i e w i n which the a p p l i c a n t views the i n t e r -viewer w i t h mounting t e r r o r ; he f e l t confronted w i t h a r u t h l e s s system. A disagreement between Dan and Jeanine on basic i n t e r -p r e t a t i o n began t o appear. I t seemed strange, t o o , t h a t Jeanine had missed the element of monstrosity and c a r i c a t u r e i n her p a r t . Were her stage v o i c e and r a t h e r l i f e l e s s I n f l e c t i o n s connected w i t h t h i s ? I f e l t t hat a powerful r e s i s t a n c e was operating towards the idea of p l a y i n g somebody t o t a l l y d e s t r u c t i v e , a c a s t r a t i n g b i t c h , i n f a c t . Such a r e s i s t a n c e i s h i g h l y understandable since p r a c -t i c a l l y everyone I s aware of t h e i r own d e s t r u c t i v e power and f e a r s i t . The f e a r of pre s e n t i n g oneself on stage as a thoroughly n a s t y person does prevent some a c t o r s from p l a y i n g such p a r t s as Ric h a r d I I I or Lady Macbeth, w h i l e others seem able t o t o l e r a t e 37 themselves i n such r o l e s without worry. S t a n i s l a v s k i has some i n t e r e s t i n g remarks i n My L i f e I n Art i n connection w i t h t h i s problem: On the other hand there are actors who are ashamed to show themselves. In p l a y i n g a good or kind man i t seems immodest to them to don those good q u a l i t i e s as t h e i r own. P l a y i n g e v i l , debauched or dishonest men, they are ashamed t o make t h e i r own the q u a l i t i e s the p o r t r a y a l c a l l s f o r . But having masked themselves, they are no longer a f r a i d t o show t h e i r f a u l t s and t h e i r v i r t u e s and can speak and say what they could never a f f o r d p p t o do i n t h e i r own person and without a mask. •Jeanine, at l e a s t i n t h i s p a r t , was unable t o assume the necessary d e s t r u c t i v e q u a l i t i e s , even w i t h the mask, and t h i s r e s i s t a n c e appeared to account f o r her view of the r o l e , as w e l l as f o r the f a l s e and l i f e l e s s tone of her v o i c e . Excerpt from P i c n i c , by W i l l i a m Inge 2 3 Mike and J i l l The dialogue of t h i s p l a y, u n l i k e t h a t of the P i n t e r sketch, was w r i t t e n i n a n a t u r a l i s t i c way. The scene was played, i n i t s f i n a l v e r s i o n , w i t h r e a l f e e l i n g . Mike moved i n a relaxed way on stage, and could stand s t i l l without l o o k i n g wooden. Neither used a 'reading' q u a l i t y or s p e c i a l stage v o i c e , and both showed a grasp of character. While Mike had no serious speech problem, he d i d o c c a s i o n a l l y become monotonous. J i l l ' s voice was much more l i v e l y and she used a wide range of tone. She was vigorous and attacked the part w i t h energy, sometimes w i t h r a t h e r more than 2 2 C o n s t a n t i n S t a n i s l a v s k i , My L i f e I n A r t , Meridian Books, The World P u b l i s h i n g Co., Cleveland and New York, 1956, p. 188. 2 3''Picnic", from Four P l a y s , New York Random House, 1958. the; part r e q u i r e d . She d i d not always seem t o grasp the emotion-a l l e v e l of the sub-text. They d i r e c t e d the scene by mutual c r i t i c i s m , and had come t o an agreement about i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n which was genuine, and not s u p e r f i c i a l or merely apparent. I n r e h e a r s a l they s a i d t h a t they had changed the bloc k i n g f r e q u e n t l y , and i t reached i t s f i n a l form by t r i a l and e r r o r . They doubted i f they knew e x a c t l y where the u n i t s came, though they were aware of the scene's mood changes. They made suggestions t o each other about the ch a r a c t e r s , and how they would r e a c t t o each other. J i l l found the l i n e s easy t o l e a r n , and absorbed them i n r e h e a r s a l . Mike memorized longer passages at home, but s a i d he found t h a t he imagined the scene and the other person so in*» t e n s e l y when working on h i s own, t h a t he f e l t s u r p r i s e d and p s y c h i c a l l y d i s l o c a t e d when confronted w i t h the r e h e a r s a l room and J i l l p l a y i n g the p a r t . He t h e r e f o r e found i t wise t o do as much work as p o s s i b l e i n a s t r i c t l y r e h e a r s a l environment. I n approaching her p a r t , J i l l imagined the s i t u a t i o n as c o n c r e t e l y as she c o u l d , b u i l d i n g up the background i n the same way tha t Anne had i n The Rainmaker. She e s t a b l i s h e d how o l d she was, what kind of s o c i a l background she possessed, how much money, and so on. Mike went through h i s part i n a s i m i l a r way and created an I n d i v i d u a l h i s t o r y f o r i t . He invented a c t u a l happen-ings connected w i t h the character's p a r t and environment, on the basis of h i n t s thrown out by the t e x t . J i l l and Mike d i d not d i s p l a y a tendency t o use any s p e c i a l k i n d of voice i n t h i s scene, and i t was worthwhile t o see i f one could d i s c o v e r why. One c o n s i d e r a t i o n concerned the w r i t t e n s t y l e 39 of the play. It was near to their own everyday speech, since the author is a contemporary North American. Although not precisely the same as the speech of Canadians, i t s idiom would not present any problems of unfamiliarity or accent to anyone raised on this continent. This i s no explanation of their success, howeverj since actors can be 'liney* in a perfectly familiar idiom. The most probable explanation of their success would appear to be their method of working as individuals, and the fact already noted, that they arrived at a genuine agreement on the interpretation of the scene. J i l l displayed throughout the project an outstand-ing, capacity for unselfconscious behaviour on stage, which was evident in this scene, though more obvious in her Sound and Movement activities and In her part (Dodo) in The Sport of My Mad  Mother. No other couple who undertook these scenes came to so close an agreement on interpretation or employed such similar methods of working on their parts. There were Individuals who achieved an individual success, but Mike and J i l l achieved a joint one. 2k Excerpt from The Dutchman , by Leroi Jones Jan and Daniel Jan and Daniel performed the f i r s t half of this short play. Both had studied i t during the f i r s t year Theatre course and been impressed with i t , though i t was a hard choice for their age and experience. They said that they would have been helped by having a 'i The Dutchman and The Stone. Two Plays, Morrow, New York, 196k ko d i r e c t o r . Jan p a r t i c u l a r l y f e l t t h i s . Since the scene takes place i n a subway t r a i n , movement was n e c e s s a r i l y l i m i t e d , and the conversation t a k i n g place between the two characters was unaccompanied by p h y s i c a l a c t i o n , except f o r gestures. She thought a d i r e c t o r would have been h e l p f u l at t h i s p o i n t . The part Jan t a c k l e d i s a challenge t o an a c t r e s s . I t represents more than an i n d i v i d u a l . This white woman, t o the author, i s a symbol of white America, and her f e a r f u l energy and n o i s y e x t r o v e r s i o n cover a fundamentally murderous a t t i t u d e . Jan t a c k l e d the part v i g o r o u s l y , moved w i t h a swagger and t a l k e d w i t h a l o u d , s a r c a s t i c voice which had a c u t t i n g edge. Her v a r i a t i o n i n mood and p i t c h of voice was not gr e a t , and having e s t a b l i s h e d the s a r c a s t i c tone, she tended t o stay w i t h i t . The i n t e n s i t y and i n i t i a t i v e t h a t the part needed began t o f l a g as the scene progressed. D a n i e l had an e a s i e r time as f a r as energy was concerned. He d i d not have t o take the i n i t i a t i v e and could s i t back pas-s i v e l y , accepting a l l that was being handed out t o him. He d i s -played an unusual degree of v o c a l ease and casualness and t h i s was tru e of h i s p h y s i c a l posture t o o . The performance was s l i g h t , and i t was d o u b t f u l t h a t he would have managed c o n v i n c i n g l y the huge r e t a l i a t o r y speech at the end, had they performed the whole p l a y . H i s problems d i d not l i e at a l l i n the area of v o c a l s t r a i n or phoniness, and h i s voice was that of h i s everyday con-v e r s a t i o n . I n f a c t , he made no attempt t o reproduce the approp-r i a t e accent or mannerisms, but played the part as hi m s e l f . I n t h i s way he gave the appearance of ease and r e l a x a t i o n . Jan, attempting t o become t h i s t e r r i b l e and d e s t r u c t i v e female, very much against the g r a i n , sounded ' l i n e y ' and s t r a i n e d . The words were learned and unspontaneous. Her d i f f i c u l t i e s were very s i m i l a r t o those of Jeanine, and she seemed t o f e e l the same reluctance t o be thoroughly nasty, but she saw, u n l i k e Jeanine, that d e s t r u t i v e n e s s was what the part r e q u i r e d , and d i d not t r y t o r a t i o n a l i z e t h i s away. Her work was h i g h l y organized and i n t e l l i g e n t — t h i s was a l s o t r u e l a t e r i n her work on The Sport  of My Mad Mother. She had memorized her l i n e s at home and she s a i d that she l i k e d t o know a l l the l i n e s w e l l before the f i r s t r e h e a r s a l . D a n i e l was l e s s h i g h l y organized and had learned h i s l i n e s mostly at the r e h e a r s a l s ; a l l h i s work on the part was, i n f a c t , done i n r e h e a r s a l and not at home. Jan had worked on the part i m a g i n a t i v e l y outside the r e h e a r s a l s i n s o l i t u d e , and found at the outset t h a t t h i s created a gap between her imagined scene and the r e a l i t y of the r e h e a r s a l . As time went on, the work done i n r e h e a r s a l closed the gap. Mike had had a s i m i l a r d i f f i c u l t y i n The P i c n i c . Jan had not worked at b u i l d i n g up the background of the c h a r a c t e r , i n f a c t , both of them looked f o r ways of f i n d i n g the appropriate emotion r a t h e r by t r y i n g t o imagine themselves i n such a s i t u a t i o n . Jan seemed t o be s i m u l a t i n g anger and never f e e l i n g i t . I t was a h i g h l y conscious and i n t e l l i g e n t performance which d i d not operate at the I n t u i t i v e or i n s t i n c t i v e l e v e l . D a n i e l ' s d i d , but i t was on a small s c a l e and needed more work. These scenes concluded the work of the f i r s t term. A l l the students had shown an a b i l i t y t o handle a t e x t competently, though some were c l e a r l y more experienced than others. Problems had a r i s e n , and some suggestions of a cause or causes had emerged. There were h2 f a r fewer purely v o c a l problems i n the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s than i n the scenes, a f a c t that was i n I t s e l f suggestive. h3 Chapter 2. Work Done in the Second Term During this term the emphasis f e l l more heavily on working •with a text j though at the beginning we taped an improvisation. After that, we turned to oral reading, that i s to the sight-reading of a text; and then to the f i r s t act of The Sport of  My Mad Mother, which was rehearsed for four-and-a-half weeks. The two oral readings were taped, as well as three stages of the play. Individual responses to both these activities are con-sidered in Chapter h. Here i t i s necessary to say why we did them, and why these texts were chosen. The oral readings were done in order to see whether any of the students had acquired sufficient s k i l l to overcome a •reading' or 'liney' quality in the practice of oral reading at sight. This i s a demanding exercise, different in many ways from acting, although acting s k i l l helps. I t requires quick coordination between eye and tongue, an a b i l i t y to scan the lines a l i t t l e ahead of speaking them, and an extremely quick grasp of character in the case of narrative or dramatic material. It would be interesting to contrast and compare the findings, i f any, with those arising,from work on the play, noting, for example, whether the response of individuals was similar to or different from their response to the text of the play. This could be done by applying analytical categories to both sets of work. Necessary minor variations in these categories would not i n -validate the comparison. The one activity allowed for no development of the material, and could only depend on a b i l i t i e s already cultivated, while the Mf other had a future, so to speak, the material being developed over a long period. 1 The Oral Readings The f i r s t of the o r a l readings was taped towards the begin-ning of t h i s term, and the second towards the end, with the work on the play coming i n between. This was done i n order to see whether working i n t e n s i v e l y on the play would make any difference to the qu a l i t y of the reading. The students read the material of the o r a l readings s i l e n t l y to themselves, and then recorded i t immediately. After the f i r s t reading I asked some questions and these, along with the r e p l i e s , are included on the tape. The texts f o r the f i r s t reading gave no i n d i c a t i o n as to what t h e i r sources were, nor whether the passages were taken from drama or l i t e r a t u r e . The student had to i n f e r the nature of the text from i t s s t y l e . Three of the excerpts were not from drama at a l l . This was done i n order to see whether the student would be able to reproduce the appropriate reading style f o r himself. At the second reading they were given bound copies of the plays, so that there could be no doubt as to the nature or authorship of the material they were to read. The passages used f o r the f i r s t reading consisted of: 1 . a simple narrative, part of a children's story c a l l e d The F l y i n g Postman; i t had a simple style which concentrated on events ^•Texts of these readings are to be found i n Appendix D, p. i <?/ h5 r a t h e r than s u b t l e t i e s of atmosphere; 2. a d e s c r i p t i v e passage from Jane Eyre, which was elaborate and based on a d i f f i c u l t grammatical sentence s t r u c t u r e ; 3. two passages, one male and one female, from Shaw's The  A p p l e c a r t , — King Magnus' views on p o l i t i c s and p o l i t i c i a n s , and one of O r i n t h i a ' s r h e t o r i c a l speeches; and f i n a l l y k. some simple s a t i r i c verses, Goodbat Nightman, a d i g at Batman  and Robin. The passages used i n the second reading c o n s i s t e d of excerpts from: The Room, by Harold P i n t e r , (women) and from 2. A S l i g h t Ache, a l s o by P i n t e r , (men); 3. a speech of L y s i s t r a t a , again from The A p p l e c a r t , (women) and a speech of the Prime M i n i s t e r , Proteus, from the same p l a y , (men) and f i n a l l y k. two excerpts from plays by B e r t o l d Brecht, a passage from The  Measures Taken, p a r t l y i n verse and p a r t l y i n prose (men), and the opening s e c t i o n of J u d i t h K l e i n ' s telephone conversation from The  Jewish Wife. The f i r s t group of readings r e q u i r e d p r i m a r i l y an a b i l i t y i t o adapt t o d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s , t o f e e l out the period v o c a l l y , as i t were. I n the second group, although the demands upon a d a p t a b i l i t y were l e s s extreme, the emotional demands were g r e a t e r . I n The R^pmsRose a l t e r n a t e s between f e a r and anger; i n the passage from A S l i g h t Ache, the expression of f e a r and resentment b u i l d s up i n a long crescendo. Proteus, i n The A p p l e c a r t , conceals h i s d i p l o m a t i c triumph i n a burst "of s e n t i m e n t a l i t y , w h i l e e a r l i e r , L y s i s t r a t a almost explodes w i t h r a d i c a l rage at the system which ^6 i s governing the country. Another kind of p o l i t i c a l commitment i s expressed i n The Measures Taken, a ser i o u s but not very hope-f u l one. I n The Jewish Wife, deeply f e l t emotion i s concealed behind a normal b r i g h t , everyday manner. These passages v a r i e d a good d e a l i n the degree of openness of the emotion expressed. For i n s t a n c e , both J u d i t h K l e i n and Proteus have t h e i r own very d i f f e r e n t reasons f o r concealing c o n s c i o u s l y t h e i r r e a l f e e l i n g s ; w h i l e at the opposite end, Rose and Edward i n the two P i n t e r plays cannot conceal t h e i r a g i t a t i o n at the presence of the stranger who turns up unexpectedly i n t h e i r homes. In g e n e r a l , the students found the f i r s t set of readings more d i f f i c u l t than the second; some of the reasons may be ov-v i o u s , but are s t i l l worth l o o k i n g at i n r e l a t i o n t o the p r o j e c t as a whole. The most obvious f a c t t h a t came t o l i g h t was that t h e i r education i n school had given them very l i t t l e o p p o rtunity f o r reading aloud, or f o r any other forms of expression i n speech (debating was sometimes undertaken i n Grade 8 but u s u a l l y not continued on i n t o the higher grades). This can be i n f e r r e d from the r e p l i e s everyone gave at the end of t h e i r f i r s t r eadings, when questions about experience i n reading aloud were put t o them. I n Elementary School, a c h i l d begins t o l e a r n t o read i n Grade 1 at the age of s i x , and continues t o l e a r n up t o Grade h. During these three years he reads aloud from a simple reader, t a k i n g h i s t u r n , and he does t h i s f o r at l e a s t three hours a week. But a f t e r these e a r l y years are over, reading aloud on any system-a t i c basis disappears. What happens a f t e r t h i s i s up t o the choice of the i n d i v i d u a l teacher. A new poem t o be s t u d i e d may be read aloud by a student i n the c l a s s . I t w i l l not be learned and r e c i t e d . I f Shakespeare or other c l a s s i c a l plays are studied i n High School, the students u s u a l l y l i s t e n t o a r e c o r d i n g , r a t h e r than attempting t o read the p l a y aloud themselves. G e n e r a l i z a -t i o n s are r i s k y , s i n c e methods i n education change f r e q u e n t l y , but the basic aim i n the teaching of reading appears t o be t o enable the student t o read q u i c k l y t o h i m s e l f . So f a r as he i s taught t o express h i m s e l f , i t i s through the w r i t t e n r a t h e r than the spoken word. The students thus educated come t o d i s l i k e p u b l i c speaking, when the occasion f o r i t a r i s e s . T h i s d i s l i k e would appear t o be due t o l a c k of p r a c t i s e ; i t i s c e r t a i n l y not c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ^ of a l l students at a l l times. Somewhat l e s s o b v i o u s l y , the students found the f i r s t o r a l reading harder than the second, because they were unused t o s t o r i e s and poems as m a t e r i a l f o r reading aloud, whereas they had committed themselves s e r i o u s l y t o drama, s e v e r a l of them i n High School, i n amateur dramatics and i n the Theatre Department. The p l a y , t h e r e f o r e , had become a f a m i l i a r form of the spoken word, or at l e a s t a more f a m i l i a r form than the other m a t e r i a l . I n the f i r s t set of passages the 'reading* q u a l i t y was very marked, even a l l o w i n g f o r the f a c t t h a t t h i s was s i g h t r e a d i n g . L i t t l e attempt was made t o read as i f communicating w i t h o t h e r s , and i n some cases t h i s was not even recognized as necessary. This was not so w i t h the second group of passages, where the f a c t t h a t they were a l l from drama made i t obvious t h a t communication must 2 C f . Bertram Joseph, A c t i n g i n Shakespeare. Routledge and Kegan P a u l , London, I960, i n chapter one where he discusses at l e n g t h the education of c h i l d r e n In reading and r h e t o r i c , i n the E l i z a b e t h a n and Jacobean p e r i o d s . K8 be attempted. I n r e t r o s p e c t , the o r a l readings would appear t o have been the most demanding and d i f f i c u l t of a l l the e x e r c i s e s undertaken, and those f o r which the students were l e a s t w e l l equipped. The Sport of My Mad Mother. Act 1 , by Ann J e l l i c o e . T h i s p l a y expresses movement r a t h e r than p l o t , a c t i v i t i e s r a t h e r than a c t i o n . There i s one l a r g e movement or r e c u r r i n g theme which b u i l d s t o a climax i n the l a s t a c t : the e x p u l s i o n or r e j e c t i o n of Gone by G r e t a , which a l s o means h i s surrender of the l e a d e r s h i p of the gang. The author has w r i t t e n i n her preface t o the play ttiat the r e l a t i o n s h i p between Greta and Cone was not the main point of emphasis i n her o r i g i n a l i n t e n t i o n , but r a t h e r the c o n f l i c t between the i n s t i n c t i v e , v i o l e n t Greta and the American l i b e r a l , Dean who f e e l s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r p u t t i n g t h i n g s r i g h t i n a t e r r i b l e w o r l d , and p r o t e c t i n g the u n d e r - p r i v i l e g e d . I n the f i r s t act t h i s i s l i g h t l y sketched i n through h i s p a t e r n a l a t t i t u d e towards Dodo, but even here i t i s Cone's obsession w i t h the as yet unseen Gr e t a , t h a t dominates the t a l k . The t i t l e i s taken from a Hindu proverb, ' A l l c r e a t i o n i s the sport of my mad mother, K a l i . ' Greta i s the i n c a r n a t i o n of t h i s amoral goddess who gives w i t h one hand and destroys w i t h the other, a s o r t of immortal c a s t r a t i n g b i t c h . The a c t i v i t i e s of Cone, Fak, P a t t y , Dean and Dodo ar e , i n m i n i a t u r e , the sport of K a l i - G r e t a . These characters t a l k themselves i n t o v a r i o u s s t a t e s of excitement and f e a r . They do not experience emotion at a pro-found l e v e l , but are i n a constant s t a t e of f l u x , a l t e r n a t e l y exalted or depressed. They enjoy words and word-plays which they use almost l i k e drugs, c r e a t i n g r i t u a l i n c a n t a t i o n s out of them. These r e s u l t i n rhythmic chanting, and p r i m i t i v e dance, as w e l l as p l e n t y of n o i s e . A continuous motif throughout the p l a y i s the unseen, menacing and aud i b l e presence of the r i v a l gang from Aldgate. I n Act I I I t h i s culminates i n a powerful o f f - s t a g e f i g h t . The a c t i v i t i e s of the three p r i n c i p a l s , Cone, Fak and P a t t y are f r e q u e n t l y brought t o a h a l t , even at the point of f r e n z y , by sounds o f f - s t a g e i n d i c a t i n g the presence of the other gang. A l l respond t o the t h r e a t , but Cone does so w i t h p e c u l i a r i n t e n s i t y : the f i r s t act concludes w i t h h i s c a l l f o r p r o t e c t i o n from Greta. He c r i e s her name aloud and then r e v e r t s t o tha t other name, which i n d i c a t e s the u n d e r l y i n g r e a l i t y of t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p , "MamaI Mama I 1 . I t was e s s e n t i a l t o avoid a l i t e r a r y or i n t e l l e c t u a l p lay whose s t y l e might render a reading q u a l i t y more probable (see the remarks i n the previous chapter on The Rainmaker, p . 3 2 ) . The  Sport of My Mad Mother i s w r i t t e n i n short sentences i n a C o l l o q u i a l idiom, though there are exceptions t o t h i s throughout. Although the E n g l i s h i s as spoken i n England, and furthermore, cockney, i t proved q u i t e t r a n s l a t a b l e f o r North American students. I t s main i n t e r e s t w i t h regard t o t h e . p r o j e c t was the wide v a r i e t y of v o c a l demands i t makes. F i r s t of a l l , there are the leng t h y , casual comments about the show, d i r e c t e d t o the audience by Steve a c t i n g as compere. He opens i t , i n f a c t , by t e l l i n g the audience l i g h t l y h i s views on th e a t r e and music. Dean a l s o ad-dresses the audience i n t h i s way, e x p l a i n i n g how he f e e l s and what i s going on. The dialogue between the p r i n c i p a l s i s i n f o r m a l and 50 slangy, l e a v i n g a l o t t o be understood by i m p l i c a t i o n . As w e l l as the short o n e - l i n e d i a l o g u e , there are l o n g , i n d i v i d u a l set p i e c e s , l i k e l y t o be an a c i d t e s t both f o r a ' l i n e y 1 d e l i v e r y or a tendency t o o v e r - a c t i n g and u n r e s t r a i n t . Such pieces are Fak's O If K i l l e r Song , h i s 'present 1 speech , and P a t t y ' s speech about Gre t a . While Fak's speech and song are s u c c e s s f u l as dramatic w r i t i n g , P a t t y ' s l i n e s about Greta are not. Even an experienced a c t r e s s could have t r o u b l e w i t h them. These l i n e s t r y t o convey i n f o r m a t i o n about Greta and her u n i v e r s a l i n f l u e n c e , but as the instrument, of t h i s communication, P a t t y has t o come r i g h t but of c h a r a c t e r , and i n e v i t a b l y , become l i t e r a r y and heavy. I t d i d not work, and we cut the speech a l i t t l e . There are a l s o s e c t i o n s of n o i s y , angry, quick d i a l o g u e , v a r i e d w i t h sharp drops i n t o s i l e n c e through f e a r . One of the r i t u a l s of the t r i b e i s the v e r b a l and sometimes p h y s i c a l b u l l y -i ng of a s e l e c t e d v i c t i m , taken up t o a point of f r e n z y , f o l l o w e d by c o l l a p s e through exhaustion or i n t e r r u p t i o n . This leads t o very c l o s e group v o c a l i n t e r a c t i o n , sometimes supported by the percussion instruments of Steve, the compere. Those who are teased i n t h i s way are P a t t y , Dean and Dodo. P a t t y i s the v i c t i m of Fak and Cone; Dean of Cone, Fak and P a t t y , w i t h Dodo p r o t e s t -i n g ; and Dodo of the three p r i n c i p a l s again. This p a t t e r n produces d i f f e r i n g sets of v o c a l sounds. And the r i t u a l nature of the b u l l y i n g leads t o rhythmic chanting and i n t e r m i t t e n t s i n g -i n g . As w e l l as these v a r i o u s forms of v e r b a l e x p r e s s i o n , some ^The Sport of My Mad Mother. (Appendix E ) , p . i o i , Sbid.. p. 33 a c t o r s are r e q u i r e d t o produce non-verbal sounds and animal n o i s e s , not u n l i k e the Sound and Movement e x e r c i s e s already p r a c t i s e d by the group. Casting was not d i f f i c u l t , except f o r the two female r o l e s . Jeanine had l e f t the group by the time we came t o cast the p l a y , l e a v i n g Jan and J i l l . J i l l had a lready shown h e r s e l f i n v e n t i v e and unseTconscious i n the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y In the Sound and Movement e x e r c i s e s , where she had produced impressive animal n o i s e s . She would o b v i o u s l y do w e l l as Dodo who, on encountering the audience, d e s p e r a t e l y and p a t h e t i c a l l y t r i e s t o engage t h e i r a t t e n t i o n w i t h animal i m i t a t i o n s . This l e f t Jan f o r P a t t y which was not i d e a l , s i n c e she had shown some signs of s t r a i n i n her scene from The Dutchman when expressing anger, one of P a t t y ' s r e a d i e s t emotions. How t h i s worked out i s discussed i n g r eater d e t a i l i n Chapter h. I n general i t i s t r u e t o say t h a t The Sport of My Mad Mother turned out t o be a rewarding agent i n b r i n g i n g t o the surface both s t r e n g t h and weakness i n v o c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s . I n d i v i d u a l a c t o r s , whose work i s s t u d i e d In the next chapter I n the next chapter, the work of Rob, Jan and D a n i e l , who played the p r i n c i p a l p a r t s i n the p l a y i s considered i n d e t a i l , and that of Dan and Mike t o a l e s s e r extent. The i n t e r e s t i n the case of the l a s t two l a y i n the f a c t t h a t they had t o r e l a t e d i r e c t l y t o an audience, and the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h i s i n i t s e l f might have s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r the c e n t r a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the p r o j e c t . The work of a l l these a c t o r s i s s t u d i e d i n r e l a t i o n t o 52 a l l the work done, and not simply t o t h a t undertaken i n the p l a y . As i n d i v i d u a l s , Rob and D a n i e l contrasted s t r o n g l y . Rob was both more ex t r o v e r t e d than D a n i e l , and more experienced as an a c t o r . Apart from heavy involvement i n drama courses at s c h o o l , he had taken courses from Ho l i d a y Theatre c o n s i s t e n t l y f o r ten years, and at the age of twelve had taken part i n a Canadian movie. He had played q u i t e d i f f i c u l t r o l e s , such as Jean i n Ionesco 1s Rhinoceros - V which was performed by P o i n t Grey High School i n Vancouver, 1970. He set about a r o l e w i t h competence and confidence. The confidence may have been a surface phenomenon, as he s t a t e d s e v e r a l times t h a t he was nervous on stage. I f he was nervous he tended t o b l u s t e r and l o s e r e s t r a i n t . He com-mitted h i m s e l f whole-heartedly both t o the p r o j e c t and t o a c t i n g i n g e n e r a l . H i s i n t e r e s t i n t h e a t r e l a y p r i m a r i l y i n the sphere of dramatic a r t , though he had some i n t e r e s t i n d i r e c t i n g . He was much l e s s concerned w i t h dramatic l i t e r a t u r e and the problems of the playwright or w i t h the t e c h n i c a l problems of scene design and l i g h t i n g . D a n i e l had a much q u i e t e r p e r s o n a l i t y , and was more r e f l e c -t i v e . He had w r i t t e n a play w h i l e s t i l l at school and made a f i l m which won second p r i z e i n the B. C. movie-making contest f o r High Schools, i n 1969. He had studied w i t h the Vancouver a c t r e s s , D o r i s C h l l c o t t , i n drama courses which he took at school i n grades 9 and 11. He had not made up h i s mind completely whether he would commit himself t o a p r o f e s s i o n a l career on stage. ^Eugene Ionesco, Rhinoceros. The C h a i r s . The Lesson. Tr a n s l a t e d by Donald Watson, Penguin Books, Middlesex, England, 1962. 53 He was q u i e t i n r e h e a r s a l and d i d not dispute suggestions made t o him. He r a r e l y invented any o r i g i n a l touches of h i s own, but i f he d i d , he introduced them without any previous d i s c u s s i o n , and without apparently r e a l i z i n g t h a t he was doing anything new. H i s rhythm of working was slower than Rob's and he d i d not p i c k up suggestions q u i c k l y , e i t h e r i n the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s or the p l a y . He would work away at them s l o w l y . Rob was much more v e r b a l i n r e h e a r s a l , and f r e q u e n t l y put forward ideas and sugges-t i o n s . I n order t o make an impact, D a n i e l had t o draw himself out, w i t h encouragement from o t h e r s ; w h i l e Rob, on the other hand, had t o r e s t r a i n an impact t h a t became, at times, too f o r c e -f u l . I n the o r a l reading Rob d i s l i k e d the tape r e c o r d e r , and when i t was on, d i d not do h i m s e l f j u s t i c e . A l l were unused t o being recorded i n t h i s way, and t h i s came out i n the f i r s t o r a l reading i n p a r t i c u l a r . By the time the second one was taped, they had become used t o i t , as we taped s e v e r a l r e h e a r s a l s of the p l a y ; t h i s showed i n the q u a l i t y of Rob's reading very c l e a r l y , though other f a c t o r s may have been at work as w e l l . D a n i e l ' s f i r s t reading was very q u i e t and non-communicative. He seemed t o hide himself v o c a l l y . L i k e Rob, he had g r e a t l y improved by the time the second one was recorded. Jan d i d not have the a t r e i n mind at a l l as a career, as has a l r e a d y been noted. Her main i n t e r e s t s as a student l a y i n the f i e l d of s o c i o l o g y and education, at l e a s t i n her f i r s t year. She was, however, very i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e a t r e and a c t i n g and dramatic l i t e r a t u r e . At school she had played O l i v i a i n T w e l f t h  Night and had done two years of H o l i d a y Theatre. Of the three so f a r d i s c u s s e d , she had that q u a l i t y I have c a l l e d a 'reading 1 q u a l i t y or ' l i n e y ' d e l i v e r y most c l e a r l y marked. This revealed I t s e l f , t o some extent i n the L e r o i Jones scene from The Dutchman1 but -was more s t r i k i n g during her p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n The Sport of  My Mad Mother. As a person, she was much l e s s e x t r o v e r t e d than Rob, but more so than D a n i e l . She gave the impression of being i n t e n s e l y i n t e r e s t e d i n most areas of her work as a student, and i n a f a i r l y i n t e l l e c t u a l way. She was committed t o the p r o j e c t and had w e l l - o r g a n i z e d h a b i t s of work; she was always w e l l -prepared i n any s i t u a t i o n that needed p r e p a r a t i o n . She somewhat lacked the quick grasp of emotion that most p o t e n t i a l l y p r o f e s -s i o n a l a c t o r s have, though she could always see w i t h her i n t e l -l i g e n c e what a p a r t i c u l a r scene or u n i t was about, and what the r e q u i s i t e f e e l i n g was. Although her v o i c e does not show up very much i n the recorded i m p r o v i s a t i o n , she seemed t o enjoy t h i s k i n d of work more than any other. She became spontaneous, and d i d p a r t i c u l a r l y w e l l i n c h e e r f u l or e x c i t i n g scenes. Mike d i d not have the same ' l i n e y ' q u a l i t y that Jan o f t e n d i s p l a y e d , but he d i d have problems of monotony and a u d i b i l i t y . A much q u i e t e r person than most, except D a n i e l , he worked from the i n s i d e outwards, and was I n t e r e s t e d i n c u l t i v a t i n g techniques f o r doing t h i s . He was more of an i n t e l l e c t u a l than Rob or D a n i e l , had a quick grasp of i d e a s , and produced work i n other d i s c i p l i n e s of a h i g h q u a l i t y . He was a l s o much i n t e r e s t e d i n d i r e c t i n g . The Dutchman and the Stone. Two P l a y s . Morrow, New York, 196k 55 Dan had been c o n s i d e r i n g the stage as a career. He had a good appearance and presence on stage, good d i c t i o n c l e a r l y -produced, but i n the a u d i t i o n s , and subsequently i n h i s scene and i n the p l a y , he sounded unspontaneous and had a s p e c i a l stage v o i c e . He was aware of the problem of going s t a l e v o c a l l y i n a p a r t , and had encountered i t before i n other p l a y s . He committed himself whole-heartedly t o the work and was anxious t o make a good attempt at h i s l o n g , audience-addressed speech i n The Sport of My Mad Mother. H i s work i n the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s was very d i f f e r e n t , and a t t e n t i o n i s drawn t o the c o n t r a s t i n the next chapter. Dan and Jan had the most d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h the 'reading' q u a l i t y j p a r t l y because there were p o r t i o n s of w r i t i n g i n the r o l e s they played which would be bound t o show t h i s up s h a r p l y where i t e x i s t e d . No one was w h o l l y f r e e of v o c a l problems, though D a n i e l came the nearest t o success at t h i s p o i n t . Where h i s problems e x i s t e d they were of a d i f f e r e n t k i n d . I n the next chapter we s h a l l take a look both at the n a t u r a l v o c a l endowment of each a c t o r , and what he was able t o do w i t h i t . Chapter 3.. Work of the P r i n c i p a l Actors i n the P r o j e c t 56 Sound and Movement E x e r c i s e and Im p r o v i s a t i o n The mechanics of the Sound and Movement ex e r c i s e should now be c l e a r from the d e s c r i p t i o n i n the f i r s t chapter. What was the i n d i v i d u a l response t o i t ? The most i n v e n t i v e and l e a s t embarrassed member of the group was c e r t a i n l y Rob. At f i r s t h i s a t t i t u d e s were n o i s y and aggres-s i v e , and he used h i s voice p o w e r f u l l y (howls, growls and angry shouts). T h i s was accompanied by menacing gestures d i r e c t e d towards other members of the c i r c l e . When a j o i n t d e c i s i o n was reached t o abandon aggression (on the grounds t h a t i t was becom-in g monotonous and r e p e t i t i v e ) he beeame much more v e r s a t i l e and produced q u i t e other kinds of sound, i n c l u d i n g non-human ones, such as ta p p i n g , c l i c k i n g w i t h the tongue and so on. Sometimes u n r e s t r a i n e d , but a l s o o r i g i n a l and f r e q u e n t l y amusing, he d i s -played great energy. L a t e r as Fak i n the p l a y , h i s work was reminiscent of h i s a c t i v i t i e s i n t h i s e x e r c i s e . V o c a l l y he was very f r e e . D a n i e l was much q u i e t e r , and i n c l i n e d t o make whimpering or groaning sounds, o f t e n i n response t o the aggressive a t t i t u d e s of Rob. He was sometimes r e s i s t a n t t o p i c k i n g up the sound and movement sent t o him, e s p e c i a l l y where they were of the ki n d he was not i n c l i n e d t o I n i t i a t e h i m s e l f . There would be a l i t t l e h i a t u s i n the c o n t i n u i t y of the a c t i o n , w h i l e he t r i e d t o make something a l i e n h i s own. He objected l e s s t o the strange or b i z a r r e than t o the angry or e n e r g e t i c . I n the counterpoint, 57 •where the r e c i p i e n t of the sound a l t e r s i t i n the d i r e c t i o n of i t s opposite, he was more i n v e n t i v e and o f t e n amusing. Here he could produce a wide range of tone, along w i t h s u r p r i s i n g sounds. V o c a l l y r a t h e r q u i e t , he would o f t e n respond t o a sound w i t h one much s o f t e r than t h a t proceeding from the o r i g i n a t o r . Jan always d i s p l a y e d energy and a l e r t n e s s i n t h i s e x e r c i s e . She picked t h i n g s up q u i c k l y and e a s i l y , unless the sound or movement was e s p e c i a l l y v i o l e n t or u n i n h i b i t e d , such as screaming and shouting; and she could v i v i d l y express such a c t i o n s as being entangled i n a s t i c k y substance. She used her high voice t o good e f f e c t , and had no problem i n making a strong v o c a l impact. Her powers of i n v e n t i o n were l e s s advanced than those of the two a l r e a d y d i s c u s s e d , and nowhere r i v a l l e d J i l l , who e x c e l l e d at animal n o i s e s . Dan's work i n t h i s e x e r c i s e was s i m i l a r i n many ways t o t h a t of Jan. He d i d not much care e i t h e r f o r screaming or y e l l i n g , though he put up a reasonable, though not completely convinced, show of doing t h i s when r e q u i r e d . He was happier when nearer t o some l e s s v i o l e n t human u t t e r a n c e . He had a l o t of p h y s i c a l energy i n the movement and was v o c a l l y q u i t e strong. Some of h i s sounds and gestures were i n v e n t i v e , though he d i d not keep up a h i g h l e v e l of i n v e n t i v e n e s s . Mike's work was s l i g h t l y more i n h i b i t e d than t h a t of the o t h e r s . This appeared t o be mainly due t o l a c k of experience i n i m p r o v i s i n g , as he grew more f r e e as time went on. U n l i k e the others (except J i l l ) , he had had no experience of drama courses, a c t i n g , or i m p r o v i s a t i o n e i t h e r at school or u n i v e r s i t y , and at 58 f i r s t seemed a b i t l o s t . Once he grasped f i r m l y what was r e q u i r e d , he d i d h i s best t o supply i t , but i t d i d not appear t o be q u i t e n a t u r a l t o him. O c c a s i o n a l l y he would l o s e t h i s f e e l i n g of c o n s t r a i n t and do something both i n v e n t i v e i n concept and s u c c e s s f u l i n execution. Mostly h i s voice was r a t h e r s o f t , but could be r a i s e d i f necessary. On the whole, though, the louder noises were r a t h e r an e f f o r t t o him. Im p r o v i s a t i o n I n the recorded i m p r o v i s a t i o n 1 which in c l u d e d a l l members of the group, Rob played a student member of an F.L.Q. c e l l . I n the s t o r y , he had p r e v i o u s l y dropped h i s jacket w h i l e committing an act of sabotage, and was now i n a s t a t e of a n x i e t y i n conse-quence. They were a l l i n h a b i t i n g an empty house, going out only t o buy food; and they had j u s t been l i s t e n i n g t o the news on the r a d i o . They now had t o make up t h e i r minds whether i t would be wiser t o go or s t a y , since t h e i r existence had become known t o the p o l i c e . I n t h i s i m p r o v i s a t i o n Rob was l e s s convinced of what he was doing than i n most, i f not a l l , the othe r s . I could not t e l l why p r e c i s e l y , as there were three p o s s i b i l i t i e s — he d i d not l i k e the tape r e c o r d e r , or he was unconvinced of himself as a saboteur, or he d i d not l i k e the i m p r o v i s a t i o n anyway. Watching, and l i s t e n -i n g subsequently t o the tape, the second p o s s i b i l i t y appeared t o Cassette 3, Side 1, $00" - 96«. 59 be the most probable e x p l a n a t i o n . H i s f e a r and anger sounded simulated — a rare occurrence f o r Rob when i m p r o v i s i n g . H i s voice broke i n t o a curious f a l s e t t o once or t w i c e . This break always gave the impression t h a t he was pushing too hard, i n order t o compensate f o r a l a c k of b e l i e f or f e e l i n g . I t was o c c a s i o n a l l y apparent i n the play as w e l l . This was one of the few times t h a t a voice sounded unconvinced and i n s i n c e r e i n an i m p r o v i s a t i o n . U s u a l l y Rob had a greater tendency than the others t o creat e a d e f i n i t e character when i m p r o v i s i n g , and would sometimes do t h i s when he was only a c t u a l l y r e q u i r e d t o be h i m s e l f . I n a scene i n v o l v i n g a mining d i s a s t e r , where he had a c l e a r l y defined character t o p l a y , he was very i n v e n t i v e , and dominated the a c t i o n . The r e s t of the cast had t o exert considerable energy not t o be . overwhelmed by him. The part was that of the town drunk, who i s responding w i t h q u i t e i n a p p r o p r i a t e words and a c t i o n s t o the d i s a s t e r . T h is s i t u a t i o n seemed t o be w e l l w i t h i n h i s grasp, and he conveyed a p e r s o n a l i t y f a i r l y d i s s i m i l a r from h i s own. No problem of b e l i e f occurred and he became more i n v e n t i v e as the i m p r o v i s a t i o n continued — u s u a l l y a s i g n that an a c t o r has found a s t a b l e c o n v i c t i o n about who and where he i s . Sometimes success i n c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n l e d t o u n r e s t r a i n t , as w i t h h i s p o r t r a y a l of the v i l l a i n i n the melodrama, but again he was reaching towards a d e f i n i t e r o l e t o p l a y . I t i s perhaps worthy of note that every-one was strong i n the s t o r y of the mining d i s a s t e r and t h i s support must have helped Rob t o b u i l d up the character he was req u i r e d t o p o r t r a y . D a n i e l was uneven i n the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s . I n the recorded scene h i s voice could f r e q u e n t l y be heard topping the other s , and t h i s was unusual. The n a r r a t i v e of t h i s r e v o l u t i o n a r y scene appeared t o catch h i s imagination. He cast himself as a bossy, know-the-ropes member of the c e l l . (The s i t u a t i o n had been out-l i n e d but people were l e f t f r e e t o choose what ki n d of person they wanted t o d e p i c t . ) He was emo t i o n a l l y f r e e r i n the impro-v i s a t i o n s than when he used a t e x t ; i n t h i s one h i s v o i c e became stronger and deeper than u s u a l . Not a l l emotions were a v a i l a b l e t o him, but he was v i v i d i n any s e t t i n g t h a t r e q u i r e d f e a r , excitement, urgency or concealed h o s t i l i t y . He was an e x c e l l e n t v i l l a i n ' s mate, very o i l y , i n the melodrama. He was perhaps weakest i n the expression of cheerfulness or d i r e c t anger. I n an improvised q u a r r e l scene, where he was supposed t o become angry w i t h h i s f r i e n d f o r l e t t i n g him down badly, he side-stepped anger and s u b s t i t u t e d s u s p i c i o n , s p e c u l a t i n g g r i m l y on h i s f r i e n d ' s probable m o t i v a t i o n . This was done w e l l , and gave the scene a new t w i s t , but the o r i g i n a l i n t e n t i o n , the open expression of anger (and the consequent r a i s i n g of the vo i c e ) was not r e a l i z e d . On the whole he l i k e d t o keep h i s voice down and the emotional temperature low when i m p r o v i s i n g . He was not as v e r s a t i l e as some other members of the group and s e v e r a l of h i s improvised r o l e s were s i m i l a r t o the character he created f o r Cone i n the p l a y . This was not t r u e of h i s p a r t i n the F.L.Q. i m p r o v i s a t i o n , as has been noted, where he gave an un u s u a l l y open and d e c i s i v e performance. He was a l e s s conscious a c t o r than Rob, and d i d not use h i s w i l l n e a r l y as much t o get what he wanted. Things had t o 61 f a l l i n t o place i n t h e i r own time. He d i d not make a push t o gain an e f f e c t , though sometimes i n i m p r o v i s i n g , he could o f t e n get i n t o a character or s i t u a t i o n more q u i c k l y than he d i d when us i n g a t e x t . He r a r e l y , i f ever, sounded i n s i n c e r e or f a l s e w h i l e i m p r o v i s i n g , though he was o f t e n i n a u d i b l e . Jan improvised w e l l i n a group s i t u a t i o n , though i f i t was l a r g e and n o i s y she could be shouted down r a t h e r e a s i l y ; she found the competition hard t o handle. I f others i n i t i a t e d a s i t u a t i o n she could take i t up and add t o i t , but she d i d not o f t e n s t a r t anything h e r s e l f . Her performance on the recorded i m p r o v i s a t i o n was somewhat subdued by ot h e r s , but not a l t o g e t h e r , and her voice can be c l e a r l y heard. She moved and spoke most f r e e l y i n the more c h e e r f u l group i m p r o v i s a t i o n s which she ob-v i o u s l y enjoyed, and was p o s s i b l y the only person able t o s u s t a i n uncomplicated 'good' p a r t s . She was more uneasy i n scenes w i t h fewer people, but o c c a s i o n a l l y d i s p l a y e d a g i f t f o r comedy i n these. Once she created a p a i n f u l sense of acute embarrassment i n a scene which n e c e s s i t a t e d t h i s q u a l i t y , the v o c a l e f f e c t being p a r t i c u l a r l y s u c c e s s f u l , as the v o i c e dropped lower and lower u n t i l i t faded out a l t o g e t h e r . I n her improvised work her v o i c e was l e s s s t r a i n e d and more n a t u r a l on the whole than i n her work i n the p l a y , and she could express a s t a t e of c h e e r f u l excitement or enthusiasm i n a most spontaneous way. Dan, l i k e D a n i e l , came on s t r o n g l y i n the recorded impro-v i s a t i o n . He assumed the l e a d e r s h i p of the group, though not d i r e c t e d t o do so, and h i s voice was strong and easy. I n most of h i s improvised work, h i s conversation sounded l i k e c o n v e r s a t i o n . 62 H i s work was of great i n t e r e s t because h i s c a p a c i t y t o improvise w i t h freshness and spontaneity was i n such marked co n t r a s t w i t h h i s work on a t e x t , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h a t of The Sport of My Mad  Mother, where he became s t i l t e d and unspontaneous, v o c a l l y un-n a t u r a l . One f a c t o r t o be borne i n mind i s that an a c t o r does not have t o assume the presence of an audience when he improvises; where-as, as soon as he begins t o rehearse a p l a y , he knows tha t he I s i n t r a i n i n g f o r a performance i n f r o n t of an audience. Most ac t o r s look forward t o the r e a c t i o n s of s p e c t a t o r s ; at the same time they know t h a t a performance may occasion some degree of s t r e s s . Whether Dan p r e f e r r e d t o improvise audience-free and without w r i t t e n l i n e s was a question t h a t d i d occur, though no c l e a r answer was forthcoming. I t d i d not seem a wise question t o ask d i r e c t l y of an a c t o r . H i s s i t u a t i o n i n the play r e q u i r e d not merely t a k i n g on a r o l e given t o l o n g , u n i n t e r r u p t e d speeches, but a l s o s t r a i g h t c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h the audience. This under-t a k i n g c e r t a i n l y h e l d p o t e n t i a l s t r e s s f o r an a c t o r , p a r t i c u l a r l y a young and inexperienced one. Some degree of s t r e s s may have been r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the l a c k of v o c a l freedom i n the p l a y ; i f so, t h i s s t r e s s was i n no way present i n the work he d i d on h i s i m p r o v i s a t i o n s . Mike's i m p r o v i s a t i o n s were not too d i s s i m i l a r from h i s work on h i s part i n the p l a y . He mostly chose t o improvise on the basis of h i s own p e r s o n a l i t y , an exception t o t h i s was h i s per-formance as the f a t h e r i n the melodrama, where he gave a con-v i n c i n g sketch of a heavy middle-aged man. I n s p i t e of h i s 63 s l i g h t l y d i f f i d e n t manner, he could keep up h i s p o s i t i o n i n n o i s y crowd scenes, and h i s v o i c e can be c l e a r l y heard i n the recorded scene. There was no wide d i f f e r e n c e , as there was w i t h Dan, between h i s work on i m p r o v i s a t i o n and h i s work on a t e x t . I now want t o i n c l u d e a mention of two events which occurred i n a High School drama c l a s s , since they seemed t o have so much bearing on the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the t h e s i s . The students were much younger but t h e i r v o c a l r e a c t i o n s t o i m p r o v i s a t i o n and t o a t e x t were suggestive enough t o deserve d e s c r i p t i o n here. The c l a s s , i n which the c h i l d r e n were t h i r t e e n and f o u r t e e n years o l d , was joined half-way through the course, by a new student c a l l e d C r a i g . I t was c l e a r from what he s a i d t h a t he was i n t e r e s t e d , and wanted t o p a r t i c i p a t e f u l l y . He was p h y s i c a l l y a l i t t l e s t i f f , and had a good v o i c e , which he could not, however, r a i s e t o the l e v e l of shouting. He l i k e d t o know, i n a p r e c i s e way, what was going on w i t h every e x e r c i s e and i m p r o v i s a t i o n . The students were f r e q u e n t l y given Improvisations which followed the broad o u t l i n e of a s t o r y . They f i l l e d i n the d e t a i l s , and i f the i m p r o v i s a t i o n went o f f i n a d i r e c t i o n not included i n the o u t l i n e , t h a t was acceptable, even d e s i r a b l e , provided i t d i d not become phoney, or change the basic o b j e c t i v e . (For example, i f a scene was arranged i n which two or three people want t o t a l k about t h e i r personal problems and, out of egotism, refuse t o l i s t e n t o the complaints of a f o u r t h , so t h a t the scene becomes a competitive attempt t o dominate the o t h e r s , then t h i s fundamental o b j e c t i v e should not be changed, though the subject matter of the problems could be.) C r a i g j o i n e d i n the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s , but seemed uneasy. He f r e q u e n t l y asked questions about minutiae of behaviour, and •wanted the conversations completely pre-arranged. Nothing -was t o be l e f t t o the spur of the moment. At f i r s t i t appeared p o s s i b l e t h a t he might need t h i s very c l e a r c h a r t i n g of the course be-cause he was new t o i m p r o v i s i n g , but had taken part i n plays i n the past, and thus might wish t o r e c r e a t e a more s t r u c t u r e d k i n d of r e h e a r s a l s i t u a t i o n , such as would be already f a m i l i a r . But as time went on and the a t t i t u d e d i d not a l t e r , i t began t o loo k as i f h i s need was f o r an a u t h o r i t y t o t e l l him what t o do and say. He was not q u i t e comfortable w i t h others who were develop-i n g the s t o r y spontaneously, and i n i t i a t i n g a c t i o n s of t h e i r own. What he was l o o k i n g f o r was, i n f a c t , a t e x t , w i t h every move and change of expression w r i t t e n i n t o i t . He wanted t o have a standard t o which he could conform. By way of c o n t r a s t , another student, L i n d a , gave an e x c e l -l e n t character sketch i n an improvised scene. She was a teacher t r y i n g t o help a not very happy p u p i l , who has t r o u b l e at home. She took the scene s l o w l y and c a r e f u l l y , at a n a t u r a l pace f o r the s i t u a t i o n , and even assuming an age much greater than her own. The same day we d i d some short scenes from p l a y s . Linda d i d V i o l a ' s speech from T w e l f t h N i g h t . *I l e f t no r i n g w i t h her. 2 What means t h i s lady?» I n these l i n e s the thought of V i o l a moves a long way from her f i r s t r e a c t i o n t o the g i f t of the r i n g . She works out, w i t h t w e l f t h N i g h t . Act I I , Scene I I , 1. 17-^1. 65 m i s g i v i n g , what such a g i f t from O l i v i a must mean; she appraises her own p o s i t i o n i n r e l a t i o n t o O r s i n o ; speculates on the d i f -f i c u l t i e s r a i s e d by her d i s g u i s e , and f i n a l l y hands over the tangled s i t u a t i o n t o time f o r s o l u t i o n . S u r p r i s i n g l y , Linda rushed through these l i n e s at tremen-dous speed, the words only j u s t a u d i b l e and the meaning u n c l e a r . Why d i d she make no attempt t o convey the not very complicated process of thought t h a t was q u i t e c l e a r i n the t e x t ? The d i f f i c u l t y seemed more fundamental than problems w i t h character or f e e l i n g . I t arose from a basic a t t i t u d e t o the t e x t . A d i s c u s s i o n of the meaning and context of the passage only pro-duced a s l i g h t improvement i n the pace. The tendency t o g a l l o p was s t i l l t h e r e , and she was f o r c i n g h e r s e l f t o slow down by w i l l power rather than c o n v i c t i o n about the words. Something e l s e was o p e r a t i n g , t e l l i n g her t o hurry-up and get i t over. Since the performance was i n sharp contrast w i t h the i m p r o v i s a t i o n she had done only a short w h i l e before, one had t o look f o r new f a c t o r s . One such was o b v i o u s l y the f a c t she was u s i n g a t e x t ; the other t h a t she was p l a y i n g a d i f f e r e n t kind of r o l e . The r o l e d i d not seem t o be the most s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r , since she never r e a l l y got near enough t o the part t o p r o j e c t a character at a l l . Nor had she shown a sense of s t r a i n when p l a y i n g a young adul t i n the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s . What d i d the t e x t mean t o her at the simplest l e v e l ? I n the f i r s t place i t meant words not her own, and i n an u n f a m i l i a r s t y l e ; then again, they had t o be memorized, (an unusual a c t i v i t y ) and reproduced from memory and not from i n v e n t i o n . The u n f a m i l i a r 66 a c t i v i t y of i n t e r p r e t i n g a learned r o l e appeared t o be p r i o r t o any t r o u b l e s w i t h the a c t u a l passage. Her r e a c t i o n t o t h i s demand was t o do the minimum r e q u i r e d , out of a sense of a l i e n a -t i o n from t h i s new kind of work. She h e r s e l f was not i n i t at a l l . She was repeating what the t e x t t o l d her, l i k e a c h i l d r e p e a t i n g a l e s s o n . The t e n t a t i v e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t emerged was that she was r e s i s t i n g the t e x t as i f i t were an a u t h o r i t y . She conformed t o the minimum requirement but w i t h inward resentment. She h e r s e l f had chosen th a t p a r t i c u l a r speech t o work w i t h , so the resentment was not of a s u p e r f i c i a l s o r t . But she had not begun t o t r a n s f e r the s i t u a t i o n of V i o l a t o h e r s e l f — i t remained Shakespeare's p r i n t e d page. As f a r as could be judged, i t was the t e x t , then, t h a t she f e l t was making impossible demands, demands t o which she could not measure up. Only the transference of a u t h o r i t y t o h e r s e l f could have made any d i f f e r e n c e . These two students, r e a c t i n g i n opposite ways, one seeking an a u t h o r i t a t i v e t e x t and the other running away from i t , pre-sented another area f o r e x p l o r a t i o n i n connection w i t h v o c a l response i n a c t i n g : the e x t e r n a l a u t h o r i t y of the playwright's w r i t t e n word, and the f e e l i n g s , probably not f u l l y conscious, that t h i s a u t h o r i t y e l i c i t e d . The a u t h o r i t y of the t e x t i s discussed f u r t h e r i n the f i n a l chapter. The Two O r a l Readings I n d i s c u s s i n g the two o r a l readings and The Sport of My Mad  Mother i t was found convenient, as w e l l as more p r e c i s e , t o analyze the work of the students by means of c a t e g o r i e s . Three sets of 67 categories are used, one f o r the readings and two f o r the play. They are based on a d e s c r i p t i o n of the p h y s i c a l v o c a l endowment of each i n d i v i d u a l , h i s t e c h n i c a l mastery, h i s imaginative or p s y c h o l o g i c a l grasp of what was required i n a given s i t u a t i o n , and h i s c a p a c i t y t o b u i l d a r o l e ( i n the case of the p l a y ) . The c a t e -g o r i e s f o r these areas of a c t i v i t y could not be e x a c t l y s i m i l a r , f o r obvious reasons; f o r example, the a b i l i t y t o develop a r o l e can only be discussed i n connection w i t h the play and not w i t h the o r a l readings. • D i c t i o n 1 , f o r i n s t a n c e , i s examined both i n the readings and i n the pl a y , because i t was found t h a t d i c t i o n v a r i e d i n the same person when engaged i n these two a c t i v i t i e s . Where i t was obvi o u s l y superfluous t o go over the same category t w i c e , that category i s omitted i n the d i s c u s s i o n of the pl a y . The categories f o r the o r a l readings were: 1. Experience i n reading aloud. 2. Eye-mouth c o o r d i n a t i o n . 3. D i c t i o n f a c i l i t y i n reading aloud. k. A b i l i t y t o make grammatical sense at a f i r s t r eading. 5. A b i l i t y t o reproduce sound r a t h e r than something merely v i s u a l . 6. A b i l i t y t o sound as i f communicating w i t h a l i s t e n e r . 7. Reactions t o d i f f e r e n t kinds of reading m a t e r i a l . The voices of those discussed are on tape. Abbreviations: OR I = The f i r s t o r a l reading OR I I = The second o r a l reading 68 A Note on the Use of The Tapes f o r the O r a l Readings Rob: OR I OR I I Jap: OR I OR I I D a n i e l : OR I OR I I i s recorded on i s recorded on i s recorded on i s recorded on i s recorded on i s recorded on Cassette 1, Side Cassette 2, Side Cassette 3, Side Cassette 2, Side Cassette 3j Side Cassette 2, Side 1, l»f7«-225«. I , 000' -5H-' . I I , 000*-7k'. 1 , 296'-398 11, 75*-ff. 1 , 5H'-102». Footage f o r i n d i v i d u a l passages Rob: OR I N a r r a t i v e . C h i l d r e n ' s Story (V. H. Drummond) Cass. 1, S. 1, 1^ 7' Jane Eyre (Bronte1*?. Cass. 1, S. 1, 1591 The Applecart - Magnus. (Shaw) Cass. 1, S. 1, 177' Goodbat Nightman - Poem (McGough) Cass. 1, S. 1, 195' OR I I A S l i g h t Ache - Edward. ( P i n t e r ) Cass. 2, S. 1, 000' The Applecart - Proteus. (Shaw) Cass. 2, S. 1, 22' The Measures Taken - C o n t r o l Chorus (Brecht) Cass. 2, S. 1, 32' Jan: OR I N a r r a t i v e . C h i l d r e n ' s S t o r y . (V. H. Drummond)Cass. 3, S. 11, 000'. Jane Eyre (Bronte) Cass. 3, S. 11, 11'. The Applecart - O r i n t h i a (Shaw) Cass. 3 S S. 11, 27«. Good bat Nightman - Poem (McGough) Cass. 3 S S. 11, ^-2'. QR n The Room - Rose ( P i n t e r ) Cass. 2, S. 1, 296'. The Applecart - L y s i s t r a t a (Shaw) Cass. 2, S. 1, 321'. The Jewish Wife - J u d i t h K l e i n (Brecht) Cass. 2, S. 1, 370'. D a n i e l : OR I N a r r a t i v e . C h i l d r e n ' s Story (V. H. Drummond) Cass. 3, S. 11, 76'. Jane Eyre (Bronte) Cass. 3, S. 11, 87'. The Applecart - Magnus (Shaw) Cass. 3, S. 11, 100'. Goodbat Nightman - Poem (McGough) Cass. 33 S. 11, 111'. 69 D a n i e l : OR I I A S l i g h t Ache - Edward ( P i n t e r ) The Applecart - Proteus (Shaw) The Measures Taken - the C o n t r o l Chorus Cass. 2, S. 1, 51*-1. Cass. 2, S. 1, 72'. Cass. 2, S. 1, 83'. (Brecht) Rob: 1. Experience i n reading aloud He was used t o reading aloud, r a t h e r more than the others were. He had taken part i n o r a l reading at s c h o o l , e s p e c i a l l y i n connection w i t h the drama courses. 2. Eye-mouth c o o r d i n a t i o n i n OR I He had a quick grasp of what was on the page and seemed t o have been taught t o l e t h i s eye t r a v e l ahead of h i s mouth. He was a l s o quick t o see what kind of l i t e r a t u r e he was reading. Some so r t of nervousness, not continuously present, made him stumble over words, or omit them. In OR I I There was great improvement i n c o o r d i n a t i o n over the f i r s t r e ading. No stumbles were apparent, only one s l i g h t misreading. 3. D i c t i o n F a c i l i t y i n OR I Rob had f a i r l y p r a c t i s e d d i c t i o n and was u s u a l l y a u d i b l e . He had some h e s i t a t i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y at the s t a r t , which he s a i d l a t e r was due t o nerves. He never l i k e d the tape recorder. The break i n t o f a l s e t t o , already noted i n connection w i t h an imp r o v i -s a t i o n and apparent l a t e r i n h i s work on the play1*", was not present at a l l i n e i t h e r of these readings. He used the lower See p. 58. Cassette 1, S. 1, 1591. 70 notes of h i s voi c e w e l l . The Jane Eyre passage, i n s p i t e of some stumbles, was strong and c l e a r . The Shaw passage, too, had s i m i l a r q u a l i t y . I n OR I I This was c l e a r and a u d i b l e , but o c c a s i o n a l l y f o r c e d , p a r t i c u -l a r l y i n the passage from P i n t e r . L . A b i l i t y t o make grammatical sense of the m a t e r i a l , i n OR I Mostly he made good sense of the m a t e r i a l , but experienced some f a i l u r e s i n the Jane Eyre passage (eg. the ' s t i l l green f i e l d s ' were wrongly separated from the embrowned groves.') . He found t h i s the hardest passage, i n common w i t h most people. I n OR I I The meaning was always c l e a r . 5. A b i l i t y t o reproduce sound r a t h e r than something merely v i s u a l : I n OR I Rob was s u f f i c i e n t l y experienced always t o make an attempt i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n , and t o t r y t o get away from the f e e l i n g t h a t he was merely u s i n g h i s eyes, but i n t h i s reading he sounded as i f he were f o r c i n g e f f e c t s i n order t o transcend the t e c h n i c a l d i f f i c u l t y imposed by the t e x t s . in OR I I He t r a n s l a t e d s i g h t i n t o sound i n s t a n t a n e o u s l y , and used h i s voice as an instrument t o convey c h a r a c t e r . 6. A b i l i t y t o sound as i f communicating w i t h a l i s t e n e r i n OR I His awareness of a p o s s i b l e l i s t e n e r came a l i v e i n the t h i r d passage, the l i n e s from The A p p l e c a r t . Up u n t i l then i t was very s l i g h t . Stumbles w i t h words i n the f i r s t passage (the c h i l d r e n ' s 71 s t o r y ) prevented any c l e a r sense of communication. G e n e r a l l y communication i n t h i s reading -was l e s s d i r e c t than i t had been In d i f f e r e n t circumstances ( f o r example, the read-through of the p l a y ) . I n OR I I Here he was much improved and gave a sense of being i n the presence of an audience, e s p e c i a l l y i n the Shaw passage where a good attempt was made t o convey the character of Proteus. 7. Reaction t o d i f f e r e n t kinds of reading m a t e r i a l , i n OR I He read the n a r r a t i v e passage w i t h d i f f i c u l t y at f i r s t ; at the end w i t h a touch of s t o r y - t e l l i n g technique. The second passage, from Jane Eyre, was d e s c r i p t i v e and he read w i t h some sense of i t s s t y l e , and managed t o create an appropriate q u i e t atmosphere. H i s d i c t i o n became c l e a r e r as he progressed. The piece from The Applecart was done w i t h the necessary r h e t o r i c a l manner, and h i s t i m i n g and emphases were w e l l - p l a c e d . He was somewhat confused by a complex sentence towards the end, but d i d s u s t a i n Magnus 1 mood r i g h t through. He grasped at once th a t t h i s passage was from a p l a y , and d i d h i s best w i t h t h i s p i e c e . The verses at the end of t h i s r e a d i n g , Goodbat Nightman were l e s s e f f e c t i v e as he over-dramatized the simple Irony of the poem, and made i t heavy. OR I I He read these passages w e l l , as i f f o r an a u d i t i o n ; the t i m i n g was well- j u d g e d , although i t was an a c t o r i s h reading. He conveyed the f a c t t h a t the character i n A S l i g h t Ache was an ol d e r man. I n the Shaw p i e c e , he perceived and conveyed what kind of person Proteus -was, at l e a s t i n an elementary form. He b u i l t the speech w e l l t o i t s climax and i n t e r r u p t i o n . I n the Brecht mixture of prose and verse, he made the d i s t i n c t i o n between these forms c l e a r , the only a c t o r who d i d . Once or twice the verse was over-dramatized, but on the whole the passage c a r r i e d the con-v i c t i o n of propaganda that i s believed i n by the propagandist, which was, of course, the case i n t h i s p l a y . Rob d i d not sound ' l i n e y ' or make seriou s mistakes of mean-ing at any p o i n t . H i s f a u l t s i n reading showed r a t h e r i n the d i r e c t i o n of a l a c k of r e s t r a i n t ; f o r example, he kept the piece from A S l i g h t Ache at such a high l e v e l that he was unable t o b u i l d at a l l towards a climax of i r r i t a t i o n . Jan: 1 . Experience i n reading aloud She was not used t o t h i s , and had done very l i t t l e at school except when very young. She had sometimes read t o a r e l a t i v e or t o c h i l d r e n but not r e g u l a r l y . 2 . Eye-mouth Co o r d i n a t i o n i n OR I A f t e r the reading she s a i d she was not i n good form that par-t i c u l a r day. She made s e v e r a l stumbles and mistakes, but; had an i n t e l l i g e n t grasp of what was on the page. She seemed to have been taught t o scan the page ahead. I n OR I I Her c o o r d i n a t i o n had s l i g h t l y improved over the previous read-i n g , and there were fewer stumbles and e r r o r s . 3. D i c t i o n F a c i l i t y i n OR I 73 She had a c l e a r high-pitched voice and read a u d i b l y . She made some small s l i p s In both readings. Her pace was slower i n the f i r s t reading than the second. I n the Jane Eyre passage, her d i c t i o n was p r e c i s e , and she slowed up i n accordance w i t h the meditative s t y l e . I n OR I I In the more dramatic passages her voice rose and she rushed t h i n g s , e s p e c i a l l y as O r i n t h i a i n the Shaw passage, and as J u d i t h K l e i n i n The Jewish Wife. She pushed out words i n clumps very f a s t and d i d not give h e r s e l f time t o place them. The q u a l i t y of her voice at these times became c h i l d - l i k e , and there was a suggestion t h a t , l i k e Linda p l a y i n g V i o l a , she would be pleased when i t was over. h. A b i l i t y t o make grammatical sense i n OR I She made good sense of the m a t e r i a l except f o r a s i n g l e sentence In the Jane Eyre passage, and she d i d not completely grasp the meaning i n the Shaw passage ( O r i n t h i a ' s speech) about whether greatness c o n s i s t s i n great a c t i o n or inherent greatness i n the i n d i v i d u a l . The verses presented no problem of meaning. I n OR I I Mostly the meaning was c l e a r , but there were places that gave t r o u b l e . One was the l a s t sentence of L y s i s t r a t a ' s speech i n the Shaw passage. The Jewish Wife was c l e a r as to the surface sense, but emotional understanding was l e s s obvious. 5. A b i l i t y t o reproduce sound r a t h e r than something merely v i s u a l  I n OR I This was halfway towards a reproduction of sound, but there 7^  •were moments when she lapsed h e a v i l y i n t o a 'reading' q u a l i t y . Where she slowed down f o r Jane Eyre, there was a d e f i n i t e t r a n s -l a t i o n i n t o sound 3 and an attempt t o create the appropriate a t -mosphere. The Shaw piece ( O r l n t h i a ) t r i e d t o get away from a read-aloud q u a l i t y , but the sound produced was not r e a l l y a p p ropriate. In Or I I A f u r t h e r move i n the d i r e c t i o n of sound took p l a c e , and a sense of the dramatic m a t e r i a l was th e r e . She t r i e d t o use her voice t o convey character i n t h i s r e a d i n g , but perhaps t r i e d too hard; i t became f o r c e d . 6. A b i l i t y t o sound as i f communicating w i t h a l i s t e n e r i n OR I She communicated most i n the Jane F,yra passage, l e s s i n the r e s t . T e c h n i c a l or nervous t r o u b l e s may have hindered communica-t i o n e s p e c i a l l y i n the f i r s t two passages. With Jane Eyre she concentrated on conveying meaning. J-n OR I I On t h i s occasion she kept up a c o n s i s t e n t l y higher awareness of a p o s s i b l e l i s t e n e r , but attempted t o communicate too much. She r e a l i z e d t h a t the three women were very d i f f e r e n t people, and t r i e d hard t o put them ac r o s s , but the communication was forced at times, p a r t i c u l a r l y In the Shaw passage ( L y s i s t r a t a ) . 7. Reaction t o the d i f f e r e n t kinds of reading m a t e r i a l i n OR I In the f i r s t passage she had a grasp of n a r r a t i v e form but did not convey i t w e l l , owing apparently t o some degree of ner-vousness or l a c k of c o o r d i n a t i o n on t h i s p a r t i c u l a r occasion. The Jane Eyre piece went w e l l except f o r some s l i g h t t r o u b l e s 75 w i t h d i c t i o n . The t h i r d passage, which she r e a l i z e d was from a pl a y , although t h i s was not i n d i c a t e d i n the t y p e s c r i p t , was high-pitched and petulant f o r the character of O r i n t h i a , who i s rat h e r grande dame f o r a young g i r l t o p l a y ; but i t was p o s s i b l e to make a good attempt at the vigorous declamation, as the e f f o r t s of the ot h e r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y Anne, showed. In OR I I She timed the f i r s t piece very w e l l (Rose, from The Room by P i n t e r ) and spoke the speech w i t h s i n c e r i t y . The tone d i d not have much v a r i a t i o n . She read the f i r s t two passages as i f the two women were s i m i l a r , p o s s i b l y because the second one ( L y s i s t r a t a ) would be a hard part f o r her t o play i n any case. The deeply f e l t c o n v i c t i o n i n the outpouring she could not render, even t a k i n g i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n that t h i s was a f i r s t r e a d i n g . She tended t o f a l l back on petulance, sarcasm or a note of c h i l d i s h p r o t e s t . The l i n e s from The Jewish Wife were more c o n v i n c i n g , slower, and the timing was good. There was, though, no attempt t o convey the concealed emotion beneath the b r i g h t , normal chat, although the s i t u a t i o n of J u d i t h had p r e v i o u s l y been made c l e a r . D a n i e l : 1. Experience i n Reading Aloud He had a l i t t l e experience of reading aloud i n drama courses at s c h o o l , but on the whole he f e l t he was a beginner i n t h i s area. 2. Eye-mouth c o o r d i n a t i o n i n OR I He was mostly accurate i n f o l l o w i n g the t e x t , but sometimes 76 he was slow t o p i c k up a p a r t i c u l a r word, which made him sound confused. In OR I I He had f a r l e s s t r o u b l e of t h i s k i n d , was bet t e r able t o scan ahead, and t o understand much more q u i c k l y what was on the page. 3. D i c t i o n f a c i l i t y i n OR I His voice was low and monotonous w i t h some lapses i n t o t o t a l i n a u d i b i l i t y . There was a l s o a s l u r r i n g of words due t o i n d i s t i n c t consonants. Several stumbles occurred i n the Jane  Eyre passage, a l s o h e s i t a t i o n s ; the end of the f i r s t passage (The c h i l d r e n ' s s t o r y , The F l y i n g Postman) became q u i t e i n d i s -t i n c t . I n OR I I This reading was much more audible and d i s t i n c t than the f i r s t , and a l s o more v a r i e d i n p i t c h . He s t i l l sometimes s l u r r e d and l o s t a word, eg. ' r i d i c u l o u s ' i n the excerpt from A S l i g h t  Ache. He t a c k l e d the Shaw passage (Proteus) w i t h f a r greater d e l i b e r a t i o n , and thought f o r punctuation and v e r b a l c l a r i t y , than anything he d i d i n the f i r s t r eading. h. A b i l i t y t o make grammatical sense i n OR I He d i d convey the meaning, but i n a subdued, h a l f - h e a r t e d way. He understood what he read, but played h i s understanding down. He d i d not t r y t o convey meaning by emphases or t i m i n g . A l l the prose passages were read i n the same tone and mood which d i d not enhance the sense of what he was saying i n any way. The verses were s l i g h t l y more meaningful. 77 I n OR I I This reading was d i f f e r e n t i n approach. He made much better sense of i t , and conveyed the sense much more emp h a t i c a l l y . I t appeared t o make a considerable d i f f e r e n c e t o him that he now knew at once what kind of m a t e r i a l he was reading. 5. A b i l i t y t o reproduce sound r a t h e r than something merely v i s u a l I n OR I This reading was simply v i s u a l . He made l i t t l e attempt t o t r a n s l a t e the m a t e r i a l i n t o sound; he j u s t read the words he saw, and the r e s u l t was unemphatic and monotonous. I n OR I I In the passage from A S l i g h t Ache, the f i r s t , he moved away at once from the v i s u a l , and gave an i n t e l l i g e n t reading that no longer sounded read. H i s t i m i n g and v a r i a t i o n s of tone were q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from h i s previous r e a d i n g . I n the passage from Shaw (Proteus) he made an attempt t o convey the smooth v o c a l q u a l i t y of t h i s p o l i t i c i a n , though l e s s s t r o n g l y than Rob. But i n the Brecht passage he lapsed back somewhat i n t o the more v i s u a l reading of OR I . 6. A b i l i t y t o sound as i f communicating w i t h a l i s t e n e r i n OR I He d i d not sound as I f he was communicating w i t h anyone. He was p o s s i b l y reading t o h i m s e l f , since some meaning was conveyed Though not very much. He came over as i f he would not mind i f no one l i s t e n e d . (Cf. a tendency t o hide voice and body i n r e h e a r s a l , p.15). I n OR I I There was much more communication, and some attempt t o 78 convey the kind of scene contained i n each passage, -with approp-r i a t e changes of reading s t y l e . He turned more towards a l i s t e n e r and away from h i m s e l f . 7. Reaction t o the d i f f e r e n t kinds of reading m a t e r i a l i n OR I As has been noted, he read a l l the passages as i f they were s i m i l a r i n content and s t y l e . I n the n a r r a t i v e passage (The  F l y i n g Postman) h i s voice was s o f t and l e v e l . There was ho climax or s t o r y - t e l l i n g technique. The l e v e l tone s u i t e d the d e s c r i p t i v e excerpt from Jane Eyre b e t t e r than the other passages and i t sounded more convincing than the others. The dramatic piece from The Applecart f e l l very f l a t . At the time he d i d not appear t o grasp t h a t i t was a passage from a p l a y , though l a t e r i n the l i t t l e i n t e r v i e w a f t e r the r e a d i n g , he s a i d t h a t he d i d . He conveyed no sense of the r h e t o r i c at a l l . The verse passage had some sense of rhythm, but the reading as a whole was s e r i o u s l y marred by the l e v e l tone and u n i f o r m i t y of s t y l e t h a t he used throughout. I n OR I I This reading was e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t ; he made an e f f o r t t o f i n d an appropriate s t y l e f o r each passage. I n the P i n t e r piece he recognized at once what kind of drama i t was and showed a b i l i t y i t o vary tone and tempo i n accordance w i t h the demands of the pas-sage. H i s voice remained r a t h e r low and he was unduly r e s t r a i n e d , but he d i d convey the f e e l i n g i n the l i n e s of r i s i n g panic and i r r i t a t i o n . I n the Shjiw passage he d i d not make as d e f i n i t e an attempt t o communicate the character of P r o t e u s , but i t was an i n t e l l i g e n t reading w i t h a c o r r e c t touch of r h e t o r i c a l h y p o c r i s y . 79 I n the Brecht l i n e s he made no d i s t i n c t i o n between the prose and verse and he d i d not i n t h i s case t r y t o create a s t y l e approp-r i a t e t o the f o r m a l i t y of the l i n e s . The sadness i n h i s v o i c e , though, was e f f e c t i v e , and s u i t a b l e t o the theme of the p l a y . I n commenting i n general on these readings and t h e i r value f o r the p r o j e c t , i t i s tru e t o say t h a t they turned out t o be the l e a s t i n s t r u c t i v e of the a c t i v i t i e s t h a t were undertaken. This was most probably because the t e c h n i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s of reading aloud obscured the data. The 'reading* q u a l i t y , or ' l i n e y ' d e l i v e r y t h a t was the object of i n v e s t i g a t i o n was not the same as t h i s t e c h n i c a l d i f f i c u l t y . The l a c k of mastery i n o r a l r e a d i n g , i n most cases, prevented any c l e a r perception of the kinds of problem the p r o j e c t d e a l t w i t h . Nor was anything very much added i n the way of new conclusions t h a t d i d not emerge from the other work. Rob, Jan and D a n i e l reacted t o the t e x t s p r e d i c t a b l y , and the remarks recorded under the d i f f e r e n t categor-i e s d i d not c o n t a i n anything new. The cate g o r i e s were h e l p f u l i n s o f a r as they made c l e a r e r c e r t a i n n a t u r a l endowments of each a c t o r and what he was able t o do w i t h them i n these circumstances. A l s o , the experience of D a n i e l was i n t e r e s t i n g , i n t h a t i t con-firmed an already e x i s t i n g impression, that where h i s imagination was not f i r e d by a t e x t , he would do almost nothing, and could make very l i t t l e e f f o r t . I have al r e a d y suggested a reason why they found the second reading e a s i e r than the f i r s t , which was that t h e i r education i n drama and i t s demands was proceeding at a f a r greater pace than t h e i r education i n other types of l i t e r a t u r e ? a l s o t h e i r ^See Chapter 3 5 p. k7. 80 commitment t o i t appeared t o be much gr e a t e r . The f a c t emerged that the students lacked p r a c t i s e i n t h i s sphere, that reading aloud, r e c i t i n g , and debating had only been touched on i n a s u p e r f i c i a l way i n t h e i r p r e - U n l v e r s i t y s c h o o l i n g . This was con-firmed, too, i n working w i t h students s t i l l i n sc h o o l , when reading a t e x t f o r the f i r s t time. The Sport of My Mad Mother. Act I This s e c t i o n discusses the work of Rob, Jan and D a n i e l i n the p l a y , and i s fo l l o w e d by an account of the performances of Dan and Mike, w i t h an emphasis on t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h an audience. The work i s analyzed under s e v e r a l headings f o r convenience. These are: 1. Language F a c i l i t y . S e l f - e x p r e s s i o n i n conversation. 2. Eye-mouth c o o r d i n a t i o n . 3. D i c t i o n . k-. R e l a t i o n s h i p between voice and body. 5. R e l a t i o n s h i p t o other a c t o r s . 6. Development of charac t e r . 7. A t t i t u d e t o a t e x t . 8. A b i l i t y t o reproduce sound r a t h e r than something merely v i s u a l . The nature of some of these categories i s s e l f - e v i d e n t , but others need e x p l a n a t i o n . Language f a c i l i t y was added i n order t o see i f there was any c o r r e l a t i o n between an a b i l i t y t o t a l k e a s i l y and express oneself w e l l , and a c t i n g t a l e n t . On the whole 81 there wasn't. D a n i e l , whose language f a c i l i t y was not outstand-i n g , had considerable a c t i n g a b i l i t y . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between voice and body was included t o show whether v o c a l success was matched by b o d i l y r e l a x a t i o n or v i c e versa. R e l a t i o n s h i p t o other actors discusses the way the a c t o r r e l a t e d t o others on stage w i t h him, whether h i s communication w i t h them i s d i r e c t or whether he cuts himself o f f ; other nuances of behaviour are a l s o discussed. Development of character t r i e s t o show how an a c t o r grew i n a part during the r e h e a r s a l p e r i o d , how he set about i t , and what obstacles he encountered, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n connection w i t h the v o i c e . The a t t i t u d e t o a t e x t became i n t e r e s t i n g a f t e r C r a i g and Linda had demonstrated that actors can have a q u i t e emotional a t t i t u d e t o a t e x t . I t had been observed that some people found the t e x t a s t r a i g h t - j a c k e t , and t h i s needed a c l o s e r look. The a b i l i t y t o reproduce sound r a t h e r than something merely v i s u a l i s the f i n a l category, and i t t r i e s t o summarize the preceding ob-s e r v a t i o n s In r e l a t i o n t o the object of the t h e s i s . I n the s e c t i o n on Dan and Mike, the category on r e l a t i n g t o other a c t o r s i s e l i m i n a t e d , since the point of i n t e r e s t here i s the way i n which they r e l a t e d t o an audience. This whole sec-t i o n was included i n order t o see whether t h i s made any d i f f e r e n c e i n v o c a l q u a l i t y ; whether encountering the spectators d i r e c t l y , and not by way of the f o u r t h w a l l , made the a c t o r l e s s spontaneous or more so, and i n general what v o c a l problems I t posed f o r the actors Involved. I n the event i t turned out t o be a severe t e s t of spontaneity, i n which f a i l u r e t o achieve the appearance of f r e s h -ness was q u i t e undisguised. Correspondingly, success was Immediate 82 and clear. Cast of The Sport of My Mad Mother Steve Dan Dean Mike Patty Jan Cone Daniel Fak Rob Dodo J i l l Use of the Tapes in the Sport of My Mad Mother. Act I 1. F i r s t read-through (Incomplete). Cassette 3» Side 1, 96'-250l 2. Run-through of Third Week. Cassette k , Side 11, 000»- end. 3. Individual speeches from the play and discussion of the work. Cassette k , Side 1, Dan (Steve) 6 L ' - 8 0 « ; Mike (Dean) 80'-9 k l ; Jan (Patty) 9 k-109 f; Rob (Fak) 109' f f . k . Run-through of Fourth Week. Cassette 5, Side 1, 000«-282« Second half) 282«- f f ( f i r s t half). 5. Interviews are taped on Cassettes 6 and 7a and are transcribed in Appendix A, p.131 . Particular Units, frequently cited Fireworks Unit: Cassette k , Side 11, k8» p. I k - l 6 . The • K i l l e r " Song (Rob): Cassette 3, Side 1, ll8«, p. 28. Cassette k , Side 11, 25l', p. 28. Cassette 5S Side 1, 68« , p. 28. 83 The "Present" Speech (Rob): Cassette 3j Side 1, 186', p. 33. Cassette h3 Side 1, 1111 and l80«, p. 33. Cassette kt Side 11, 392', p. 33. Daniel's l a s t speech: Cassette 3, Side 1, 2^0' , p. 38. Cassette 5, Side 1, 252'. "Greta" speech (Jan): Cassette *f, Side 1, 2^0' and Side 11, 151*, p. 21. The page numbers here r e f e r t o the t e x t of The Sport of My Mad Mother, by Ann J e l l i c o e , published by Faber and Faber, London, 196'+. The f i r s t act i s t o be found i n Appendix E, p . ' X o X . The footnotes which r e f e r t o the Cassettes and page numbers are included only as aids t o checking p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t s , and i t i s not intended t h a t they should each be l i s t e n e d t o while read-ing the account of the work on the p l a y . I f the tapes are used i t would be wise t o l i s t e n t o them f i r s t . Rob as Fak 1. Language F a c i l i t y . S e l f - e x p r e s s i o n i n conversation Rob could t a l k about the p l a y , the p a r t , and h i s problems without d i f f i c u l t y , and express himself f a i r l y f l u e n t l y . He was able t o t a l k about h i s impressions and suggestions i n r e h e a r s a l , and t o ask f o r e l u c i d a t i o n of d i f f i c u l t i e s or meaning.^ 2. Eye-mouth c o o r d i n a t i o n 7 I n the f i r s t read-through of the Act he was accurate , but he already knew the play and had taken part i n school readings of ^Interview on Cassette 6, Side 1, 000 ' - l 5 l * , t r a n s c r i b e d on p. 131 ^Cassette 3, Side 1, 93'-260«. 8k i t , reading d i f f e r e n t p a r t s . By comparison, h i s c o o r d i n a t i o n i n the f i r s t o r a l reading i s much l e s s p r e c i s e . He once s a i d t h a t he hated t o read aloud i n t o the tape rec o r d e r , and he o f t e n stumbled and became l e s s sure of l i n e s i n r e h e a r s a l when i t was re c o r d i n g . On the other hand, he was accurate and f l u e n t when reading the a u d i t i o n t e x t s , when, there was no tape recorder. When not nervous, then, he u s u a l l y read aloud w i t h quick do-o r d i n a t i o n between eye and mouth. ! 3. D i c t i o n Rob was endowed w i t h a strong voice of middle t o high p i t c h . A wide range of tone was a v a i l a b l e t o him, i n c l u d i n g good bass notes, which he could have used t o more advantage than he d i d . H i s voice had a curious break i n i t , , and at times became squeaky and s h r i l l . He o c c a s i o n a l l y exaggerated vowel sounds, so th a t a 8 s i n g l e vowel became two or more s y l l a b l e s : ' I t ' s only p o l i i i i t e l * He was somewhat n a s a l i n the middle r e g i s t e r , but he spoke forward i n t o the mask of h i s face and was always audible anywhere. I n f a c t , he had an i n s t i n c t i v e sense of the s i z e of a r e h e a r s a l room or the a t r e and pitc h e d h i s voice a c c o r d i n g l y . He had a r e g i o n a l E n g l i s h country accent o v e r l a i d by a Western Canadian one, which gave a s l i g h t l y r u r a l touch t o h i s work. k. R e l a t i o n s h i p between voice and body Rob was p o t e n t i a l l y a heavy man and came over on stage as p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y heavy-weight too. But some form of u n c e r t a i n t y , which he may w e l l grow out o f , made him s t i l l p h y s i c a l l y a l i t t l e uncoordinated. This was not apparent most of the time and o Cassette 5S Side 1, 132' and p. 33 (Appendix E) i 85 disappeared when h i s work seemed thoroughly absorbed, i . e . both l i n e s and b l o c k i n g had become so f a m i l i a r that they were pro-duced without e f f o r t ; and a l s o when he was q u i t e sure of the emotional d i r e c t i o n of a u n i t . But when at a l l u n c e r t a i n about what the u n d e r l y i n g demand of the t e x t might be, he became some-what awkward. Both v o i c e and body became r a t h e r w i l d (the v o i c e raucous and s h r i l l ) and he moved c l u m s i l y , eg. the passage, Q •They're y e l l e r ! They're y e l l e r l 1 ' I n the performance he knocked down a f l a t , and i n r e h e a r s a l he found i t hard n o i t o t r i p over Mike when he was supposed t o be l y i n g stunned on the f l o o r . On the whole he had more c o n t r o l over voice than body. 5. R e l a t i o n s h i p t o other a c t o r s His a t t e n t i o n was r a t h e r more sharply focussed on the part than on the people he was r e l a t i n g t o i n the p l a y . He had a l -ready done q u i t e a l o t of work at school and had acquired more technique than the o t h e r s , as w e l l as developing a method f o r t a c k l i n g a new p a r t . He was i n c l i n e d t o work i n i s o l a t i o n at home. Although t h i s meant improvement and growth In h i s longer passages, eg. the ' K i l l e r ' song, i t l e d at times t o a f e e l i n g of d i s t a n c e between himself and the other two p r i n c i p a l c h a r a c t e r s . T h i s i s not t o say t h a t he gave a ' s t a r ' performance which d i d not r e l a t e t o the r e s t , but i t was at times out of touch, and h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o the l e a d e r df the gang, Cone, (Daniel) never developed very much i n f e e l i n g or s u b t l e t y . I d i d not get the impression, which one should get, t h a t he knew Cone very w e l l . I n the run-through, taped i n the t h i r d week, and i n the Fireworks ^Cassette ht Side 11, l*fO», p. 20 (Appendix E) 86 U n i t , f o r example s he made a l o t of n o i s e , but was not r e a l l y aware of Cone competing w i t h him. 1^ I t was n o t i c e a b l e too, t h a t the anger w i t h P a t t y (Jan) was,voice and p h y s i c a l energy r a t h e r than genuine rage ('Don't you l i p me l i k e t h a t . . . ' ) . " 1 " 1 By the f o u r t h week there was some development i n r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h both these c h a r a c t e r s . The long passage t h a t became known as Fak's 'Present' speech, was s t i l l done as an i n d i v i d u a l a r i a , and not d i r e c t e d p r i m a r i l y at Dodo. He could speak out w e l l t o an audience, as h i s reading of the Stage Manager i n Our Town during the a u d i t i o n showed.\ I n h i s i n t e r v i e w he s a i d that he would l i k e t o have played Steve, who does d i r e c t l y address the audience. • H i s t a l e n t as an a c t o r prevented one from seeing that he i s i n some ways locked up i n himself w h i l e r e h e a r s i n g , and prone t o a n x i e t y about how i t i s a l l going. T h i s appeared t o stop him from concentrating on the development of a scene and r e l a t i n g t o the other people i n i t . 6. Development of Character He had a concept of the character of Fak from the s t a r t and d i d not diverge from i t s i g n i f i c a n t l y . H i s main problem w i t h the part was not t o appear too i n t e l l i g e n t . Fak's p o s i t i o n i n the play was that of second-in-command, Cone's n o i s y , b l u s t e r i n g a i d e , dangerous when i n a panic. Fak was not the brains of the gang and Rob had t o work on the s t u p i d i t y of the r o l e , and h i s uneasy h a l f -awareness t h a t he i s not so b r i g h t as Cone or P a t t y . This was 'Cassette k, Side 11, k 8 » , and pp. 13-15 (Appendix E) Cassette k3 Side 11, 10 k », and p. 18 (Appendix E) q u i t e d i f f i c u l t , as Rob oft e n seemed, i n the e a r l y rehearsals, much too a s t u t e . By the time of the performance, however, he had i d e n t i f i e d himself s u f f i c i e n t l y w i t h the part t o overcome h i s own appearance of i n t e l l i g e n c e . Another problem arose from h i s p h y s i c a l , and even more h i s ps y c h i c , weight on stage, compared w i t h D a n i e l ' s . He tended t o dominate him, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the e a r l y r e h e a r s a l s , when D a n i e l was keeping h i s voice w e l l down. H i s voice and weight made him s u i t a b l e f o r the p a r t , though he was not type cast f o r i t . The problem of the comparative weight of the two a c t o r s had t o be solved p r i m a r i l y by D a n i e l , w i t h some m o d i f i c a t i o n i n noise and energy by Rob. I n the f i r s t three weeks, he blu s t e r e d and shouted i n an u n r e s t r a i n e d way. To some extent the r o l e r e q u i r e d t h i s , but Rob tended t o s u b s t i t u t e noise f o r the c r e a t i o n of character at t h i s stage. He responded w e l l t o c r i t i c i s m of t h i s u n r e s t r a i n t , and by the time the performance took p l a c e , had imposed considerable moderation on h i m s e l f , and gained i n s i g h t i n t o the r e a l causes of Fak's b l u s t e r and a s s e r t i v e n e s s . I n the l a s t week, he conveyed once or t w i c e , a bleakness and depression u n d e r l y i n g the e b u l -l i e n c e . He made t r i a l runs at the ' K i l l e r ' speech and the 'Present* speech, and i n general introduced more o r i g i n a l , imaginative touches than any other member of the group, w i t h the p o s s i b l e exception of J i l l . 7. A t t i t u d e t o a Text The note on p. 63 i s r e l e v a n t at t h i s p o i n t , where the a t t i t u d e of two high school students t o a t e x t was discussed. D i d the students p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the play have s i m i l a r problems a r i s i n g out of the way i n which they r e l a t e d t o the f a c t of having a t e x t at a l l ? Rob was already somewhat f a m i l i a r w i t h the p l a y ; the others were not. He was the most s k i l l e d at assuming a f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h a t e x t he d i d not know, a l l the same. 12 (Cf. h i s second o r a l reading .) He was c e r t a i n l y the most aware t h a t he must aim t o make the t e x t h i s own and get away from the dominating presence of the p l a y w r i g h t . This may not have been a conscious thought process, but the awareness was there a l l the same. The gap between h i s performance as Fak and h i s work i n im p r o v i s i n g was t h e r e f o r e s m a l l , since i n both s i t u a t i o n s ; he appeared t o be the one who created the p a r t . He was no longer under the a u t h o r i t y of the t e x t . 8. A b i l i t y t o reproduce sound and not merely something v i s u a l I n t h i s category, the observations contained i n the preceding ones are taken i n t o account, i n an attempt t o r e l a t e them t o the question of ' l i n e y * or i n s i n c e r e v o c a l d e l i v e r y . Rob was conscious of the t e n s i o n between t e x t and speech, and i n rehear-s a l made some remarks about sounding 'phoney 1. He s a i d he was always a f f l i c t e d w i t h t h i s phenomenon u n t i l he knew h i s l i n e s 13 r e a l l y w e l l , and t h i s was borne out by the f a c t t h a t he sounded l e s s ' l i n e y ' when he was s t i l l u s i n g h i s s c r i p t i n r e h e a r s a l , than at a s l i g h t l y l a t e r stage when he was beginning t o d i s c a r d Ik i t . I n h i s i n t e r v i e w , on the other hand, he says that he 12, •Cassette 2, Side 1, 000' - 5 L l . 'Cassette k3 Side 1, 129'. Cassette 6, Side 1, 000-1511, (Appendix A, p.i'32.) 13, 1L, enjoyed the t e x t u r e of words, and t h i s seemed t r u e . He e x p e r i -mented, f r e e l y w i t h v a r i e t i e s of sound, emphases and d i f f e r i n g emotional approaches. The 'Present* speech went through s e v e r a l such changes and these can be heard i n the recordings of i t . H i s f i r s t v e r s i o n of i t was loud-mouthed, and u n r e s t r a i n e d . At times, he ranted. The b u l l y i n g a t t i t u d e was of course c o r r e c t f o r the p a r t , but i t e v e n t u a l l y became more c o n t r o l l e d and s u b t l e . By the time of the performance he had l o s t much of the some-what ham v o c a l gestures of the e a r l i e r r e h e a r s a l p e r i o d . Rob's st r e n g t h l a y i n h i s a b i l i t y t o vary tone and tempo and h i s f i r m sense of rhythm. H i s weakness l a y i n the d i r e c t i o n of noise and l a c k of c o n t r o l , and t h i s may w e l l have been due t o a p a r t i a l f a i l u r e t o r e l a t e t o other a c t o r s , which has already been noted. T h i s f a i l u r e tended t o increase c o n c e n t r a t i o n on the performance i n i s o l a t i o n , so that he seemed somewhat cut o f f . He t r i e d t o compensate f o r r e l a t i o n s h i p by s u b s t i t u t i n g an over-produced s t y l e of a c t i n g . There may a l s o have been a f a i l u r e t o b e l i e v e i n the given s i t u a t i o n adequately, a l a c k of c o n v i c t i o n about i t , as i n the famous sermon note "Argument weak here. Shout louder." He had problems of t h i s k i n d i n the f i r s t term w i t h the scene from The Rainmaker. H i s a c t u a l g i f t s and t h e i r development as an a c t o r , which were c o n s i d e r a b l e , combined w i t h these areas of weakness, made h i s performance a complex one. Jan as P a t t y 1. Language F a c i l i t y . S e l f - e x p r e s s i o n i n conversation Jan had ho problem i n communicating i n conversation. She could speak about the p l a y and her part f l u e n t l y and w i t h a wide vocabulary. 2. Eye-mouth Coordination She was accurate i n the f i r s t read-through of the p l a y , much more so than i n the f i r s t o r a l r e a d i n g . She u s u a l l y had an i n t e l -l i g e n t c o n t r o l of what she read, and gave accurate readings at the a u d i t i o n . 3. D i c t i o n She had a c l e a r v o i c e , middle t o high pitched and i t was u s u a l l y a u d i b l e , though not n a t u r a l l y very l o u d . I t was, i n f a c t , a l i t t l e s o f t f o r t h i s p a r t , and she dropped i t when others t a l k e d l o u d l y . She had t r o u b l e producing a loud scream, as the r o l e r e q u i r e s at one p o i n t . She s a i d h e r s e l f that she f e l t her voice was not loud enough i n the q u a r r e l l i n g , y e l l i n g u n i t s , and she had t o push i t c o n s c i o u s l y . However, she c o u l d , i f conscious e f f o r t was made, keep up a f a i r l y high l e v e l of sound. k. R e l a t i o n s h i p between voice and body At c e r t a i n times, and p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the f i r s t three weeks of r e h e a r s i n g , she stood awkwardly on stage, i n t e r j e c t i n g l i n e s as they came along. She was s e l f - c o n s c i o u s at t h i s stage, and found c o n c e n t r a t i o n d i f f i c u l t . She was l e s s p h y s i c a l l y awkward when there was a l o t of group a c t i v i t y going on, and she was part of the whole. On these occasions her voice came w e l l forward; f o r example, she danced and chanted i n a q u i t e r e l a x e d way during the ' K i l l e r * song, and looked as i f she was enjoying i t . She a l s o sang, and moved e n e r g e t i c a l l y during the passage where Cone, Fak and P a t t y t u r n Dean i n t o a Guy Fawkes 1^. The d i f f i c u l t y seemed Cassette L , Side 11, W+*. t o come up when the focus of a t t e n t i o n was f u l l y on her, as i n the 'Greta 1 speech, and the ensuing scene where she has t o give the i n i t i a t i v e . 5. R e l a t i o n s h i p t o other a c t o r s I n moments of c r i s i s and excitement she joined w i t h o t h e r s , and became one of the group, f o r instance both where she i s teased l6 17 • by Fak and Cone and where she j o i n s i n t e a s i n g others . She had l e s s sense of being i n contact w i t h anybody i n the one-to-one scenes, e s p e c i a l l y where o u t r i g h t anger had t o be expressed. She seemed t o cut h e r s e l f o f f from Fak or Cone i n these s i t u a -t i o n s , and t o become i s o l a t e d . The 'Greta' speech r e q u i r e s the a c t r e s s t o address the audience, i n the same way that Steve does at the beginning of the a c t . This; d i r e c t contact never q u i t e took p l a c e . The tape cannot catch a l l the problems here, since they were concerned w i t h p h y s i c a l expression as w e l l as v o c a l . The speech i s d i f f i c u l t since the c h a r a c t e r , P a t t y , ceases t o be h e r s e l f w h i l e she conveys i n f o r m a t i o n about Greta, who has not yet appeared. Jan f e l l i n t o a set of i n t o n a t i o n s which became f i x e d and thus prevented the speech from developing, as w e l l as r u l i n g out any appearance of spontaneity. This was a l s o t r u e of her anger w i t h Cone, which fo l l o w e d on soon a f t e r the speech. More than anywhere e l s e i n the play she seemed imprisoned by the t e x t i n t h i s scene, where she i s supposed t o goad Cone i n t o a r e a c t i o n . She was more s u c c e s s f u l w i t h edgy sarcasm, which was Cassette k 3 Side 11, 90' , and p. 16 (Appendix E) 17 Cassette 5» Side 1, 12«, and p. 3*+ (Appendix E) A Cassette h, Side 11, 155' and p. 22 (Appendix E) A :' ' 19 somewhat less direct. But 1Jealous 1 Jealous I Mel* never had enough indignations and became a rather set performance. Would i t have been easier for Jan to improvise anger? We did try an improvisation in which she attempted to talk Rob down; i t was partly successful, but did not carry over into the play. 6. Development of Character Jan's interview was helpful in considering how she developed 20 her role . There was constant technical improvement in her work; her voice became stronger, intensity increased, and in the last week she moved more freely. There was not a corresponding development in feeling, nor in the creation of Patty's person-a l i t y . She found the part alien to her own temperament, and from the point of view of type-casting, was in fact, mis-cast. 21 She developed well the teasing and sarcastic passages f a i r l y early on, and also her reaction to the bullying by Fak and 22 Cone . But she did not reach the anger or dominance, necessary at times to the part, as has already been noted. She said in her i interview that she found i t hard to get any variation into the angry passages. At the beginning of the rehearsal period, when she was not able to get her voice and shout, or to produce a convincing scream, we a l l tried screaming together, and apparent-l y this helped. After the improvisation with Rob she said she was helped insofar as she could feel more aggression, but this 19 Cass. ka Side 11, 169' and p. 23 (Appendix E) 2 0Cass. 7s Side 1, 000-273' 21 Cass. 5s S. 1, 12» and p. 25. Cass, if, S. 11, 155's p.22 (App. E) 22 Cass. 5S S. 1, 382* and p.l5. Cass. k , S. 11, 89', p.l6 (App. E) 93 improvement could not be r e l i e d on. There was, then, i n her work an increase i n competence, both v o c a l l y and p h y s i c a l l y , and she was always r e l i a b l e i n what she s a i d and where she was supposed t o be at a given moment. But there was not a corresponding i n c r e a s e , though there was some, i n the p r o j e c t i o n of P a t t y as a character w i t h her appropriate f e e l i n g s . The 1 l i n e y * d e l i v e r y d i d not decrease and i n some ways became worse, where c e r t a i n cadences became f i x e d and u n a l t e r a b l e . At such times the t e x t became a s t r a i g h t - j a c k e t . 7. A t t i t u d e t o a t e x t 23 Jan had C r a i g ' s problem i n more s o p h i s t i c a t e d form. I n her i m p r o v i s a t i o n s she was f l e x i b l e and l i v e l y but d i d not venture i n t o anything very o r i g i n a l and kept c l o s e t o the o u t l i n e as given. Her f i r s t reading of the play was a l s o l i v e l y , but d i d not make any s t r i k i n g progress or development. I t was not so much tha t she r e s i s t e d the a u t h o r i t y of the t e x t , l i k e the other High School student, L i n d a , but that she l e t the t e x t take hold of her and own her. She was c o n s c i e n t i o u s and quick about l e a r n i n g l i n e s and g e t t i n g the b l o c k i n g down c o r r e c t l y , but was i n c l i n e d t o r e p r o -duce, as we have seen, s i m i l a r i n t o n a t i o n s at each r e h e a r s a l , once c e r t a i n t h i n g s had been e s t a b l i s h e d . This v e r s i o n of the l i n e s , at an e a r l y point i n r e h e a r s i n g , became set i n her head (at l e a s t t h a t Is what apparently happened) and once t h e r e , I t c o n s t i t u t e d an a u t h o r i t y t h a t could not be g a i n s a i d , e i t h e r by h e r s e l f or the d i r e c t o r . To change anything, e s p e c i a l l y anything v o c a l , would cost a tremendous e f f o r t . There was a deep, though probably not conscious, reluctance t o shake o f f t h i s inwardly See p. 63. c o n s t i t u t e d d i c t a t o r s h i p . I n these circumstances the a u t h o r i t y of the t e x t and t h a t of the d i r e c t o r came i n t o c o n f l i c t . The new idea of the d i r e c t o r might gain a temporary f o o t h o l d , but, by the next r e h e a r s a l , the a u t h o r i t y of the text-In-the-head was back i n f o r c e . 8. A b i l i t y t o reproduce sound r a t h e r than something merely v i s u a l Jan had more t r o u b l e than e i t h e r Rob or D a n i e l w i t h a •reading' q u a l i t y . As we have seen, t h i s showed mostly i n the i n d i v i d u a l speech and i n a one-to-one u n i t ; much l e s s i n a l a r g e r group, where she was much more spontaneous, and t r a n s -l a t e d the t e x t i n t o sound without d i f f i c u l t y . I n anger, too, her i n f l e c t i o n s became set i n a mould, and were repeated w i t h each r e h e a r s a l . One cause f o r t h i s was suggested as a r i s i n g from her a t t i t u d e t o the t e x t : she l e t the l i n e s become a r i g i d a u t h o r i t y , and t h i s was not connected w i t h f e a r s of lapses of memory, which she d i d not have. She always seemed spontaneous, however, when the p r i n c i p a l f e e l i n g she had t o express was en-thusiasm or enjoyment, whether t h i s took place w i t h one or many. D a n i e l as Cone 1. Language F a c i l i t y . S e l f - e x p r e s s i o n In conversation At the f i r s t meeting, when he gave the a u d i t i o n , he found i t d i f f i c u l t to t a l k about h i m s e l f , and t h i s remained t r u e . He o f t e n had i n s i g h t s which he expressed b r i e f l y , and sometimes o r i g i n a l views of a character i n the p l a y . I n the i n t e r v i e w he s a i d he d i d not understand s e v e r a l of the i d i o m a t i c expressions Cassette 6, Side 1, l 5 2 « - 3 ^ 7 f . Appendix A. p . l t ^ . 95 i n the p l a y . I n r e h e a r s a l he d i d not ask f o r an e l u c i d a t i o n , and spoke the l i n e s as i f they made sense t o him. 2 . Eye-mouth Co o r d i n a t i o n . Dan i e l ' s read-through of the play was more accurate than h i s o r a l reading. There were some h e s i t a t i o n s which may w e l l have been due t o l a c k of p r a c t i s e i n reading aloud. But w i t h D a n i e l , accuracy seemed t o increase w i t h understanding and l i k i n g the m a t e r i a l , where others might make some so r t of showing even when they d i d not f u l l y grasp what they were reading about. 3. D i c t i o n He had a l i g h t , tenor voice w i t h some deep tones. He was i n a u d i b l e , at times, i n conversation as w e l l as i n r e h e a r s a l . This appeared t o be due t o a h a b i t of dropping the volume and s l i g h t l y s l u r r i n g consonants. This problem was l a r g e l y overcome, though not completely, when he gained c o n v i c t i o n about h i s p o s i t i o n as leader of the gang. He was not aware th a t he was i n a u d i b l e unless t o l d . L . R e l a t i o n s h i p between voice and body D a n i e l was p h y s i c a l l y s l i g h t . He had no a b i l i t y t o fake anything that he was not convinced about, v o c a l l y or p h y s i c a l l y . Thus he spent a l o t of time i n e a r l y r e h e a r s a l i n a very low' key and w i t h a l e t h a r g i c manner, l o o k i n g f o r something. H i s voice would f r e q u e n t l y go down t o an i n a u d i b l e mumble, and at I t s l o u d -e s t , was f a r from l o u d . I n a s i m i l a r way he would h i d e , l i t e r a l l y . Up t o the end of the t h i r d week, he would hide behind Rob who was l a r g e r , even a l t e r i n g the bloc k i n g i n order t o do t h i s . He would f r e q u e n t l y t u r n away from the auditorium and speak up stage, and o f t e n present h i s back when not r e q u i r e d t o do so. This continued, along w i t h the low v o i c e , u n t i l he managed, more by i n n e r imagination than anything e l s e , t o assume the p o s i t i o n of l e a d e r s h i p that the r o l e demanded. This d i d not come about through any c o r r e c t i o n of e x t e r n a l f a c t o r s . He never acted w i t h any c o n v i c t i o n i n the passage where he demonstrates on Fak how t o k i l l someone by aiming a blow at the 25 base of the s k u l l I n the performance the h i d i n g h a b i t s l i g h t l y r eturned, although p r e v i o u s l y , i n r e h e a r s a l , he had overcome i t . There was only one performance, and he might w e l l have regained what he had l o s t i n a second or t h i r d . 5. R e l a t i o n s h i p t o other a c t o r s D a n i e l could r e l a t e t o other a c t o r s on stage, or give the appearance of doing so. He i s o l a t e d himself l e s s than Rob. T h i s was n o t i c e a b l e from the f i r s t read-through, though he i s quiet and unobtrusive i n t h i s . I n the run-through of the t h i r d week he communicated e a s i l y w i t h the o t h e r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the s a r c a s t i c • ' 26 t e a s i n g passages, where he i r r i t a t e s P a t t y , j o i n t l y w i t h Fak. These u n i t s are f u l l of a s u l l e n sarcasm; Cone's mood i s d e s t r u c -t i v e , but not n o i s y . I n these s e c t i o n s he improved continuously r i g h t up t o the performance; but he was not at a l l easy about expressing aggression or d e c i s i v e n e s s , and refused t o encounter others d i r e c t l y i n these a n g r i e r passages. (Rob had no problem ^ C a s s e t t e 5S Side 1, MfO', and p. 18 (Appendix E) 2 6 C a s s e t t e k , S. 11, 89* and p. 15. Cass. k3 S. 11, 206' and p. 25 (Appendix E) 97 i n t h i s a r e a ) . Other passages which gave t r o u b l e were those where he had t o r e l a t e t o the audience, eg. the s e c t i o n t h a t we c a l l e d the F i r e -works U n i t . This i s a r a t h e r n o i s y and aggressive duet w i t h Fak, i n which they are t r y i n g t o s e l l f i r e w o r k s t o the audience w i t h a l o t of mock s a l e s t a l k . C o v e r t l y they are seeking t o impress P a t t y , who i s not paying any a t t e n t i o n . I n t h i s u n i t he could not r e l a t e s a t i s f a c t o r i l y e i t h e r t o Rob or t o the audience, e s p e c i a l l y the l a t t e r . H i s voice always dropped when he faced them and spoke out. This was i n c o n t r a s t w i t h h i s conscious w i s h , expressed i n h i s i n t e r v i e w , t o play Steve, who t a l k s t o the audience more than he t a l k s t o the r e s t of the c a s t . On the whole he r e l a t e d best when he was one of the gang, l e s s w e l l when r e q u i r e d t o i n i t i a t e something new. He somewhat resembled Jan at t h i s p o i n t . This s i t u a t i o n was not permanent though, as he had a n o t i c e a b l e and abrupt improvement w i t h these problems, which w i l l be discussed i n the next s e c t i o n . 6. Development of character He had a good understanding of what Cone was l i k e from the s t a r t , but minimized what he had grasped. For the f i r s t three weeks i t was a t i n y but accurate p o r t r a y a l . The development and enlargement of the r o l e was hindered by h i s low v o i c e and the tendency, already noted, to hide behind other a c t o r s . Some appropriate moods were developed e a r l y on, but the main d i f f i c u l t y was the p o s i t i o n of Cone i n the p l a y , i . e . h i s l e a d e r s h i p . D a n i e l was p l a y i n g second f i d d l e t o Rob u n t i l the end of the t h i r d week. Th i s changed a b r u p t l y , apparently as the r e s u l t of an i m p r o v i s a t i o n 98 done during the r e h e a r s a l p e r i o d . This i m p r o v i s a t i o n was arranged t o d e a l w i t h t h i s p a r t i c u l a r problem: the power r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two a c t o r s . I n i t , Jan wanted t o buy a used car . Rob and D a n i e l each had one t o s e l l . They were t o d e s c r i b e the make and m e r i t s . I t was meant t o be a v e r b a l contest i n which D a n i e l managed t o shout Rob down, and s u c c e s s f u l l y s e l l h i s car t o Jan. At f i r s t D a n i e l spoke s o f t l y though f l u e n t l y , w h i l e Rob e a s i l y topped him. D a n i e l appeared t o get angry at t h i s , and began t o y e l l . Then, without warning, he attacked Rob w i t h h i s f i s t s , moving f a s t . Rob was almost too s u r p r i s e d t o r e t a l i a t e . D a n i e l next picked up a metal c h a i r and ran at Rob w i t h i t . He was shouting l o u d l y by t h i s time. Others removed the c h a i r and he r e l a x e d . This r a i s e d r e a l d i f f i c u l t i e s about the nature of im-p r o v i s i n g which w i l l be looked at i n the next chapter. I n the event D a n i e l b e n e f i t t e d . He now had f a r l e s s d i f f i c u l t y i n c l a i m i n g the p o s i t i o n of l e a d e r s h i p . One can o n l y speculate t h a t he had unconsciously experienced Rob as a t h r e a t up t o t h i s p o i n t . Rob was h e a v i e r , had a louder voice and a l o t of a c t i n g e x p e r t i s e . Success i n competing w i t h him apparently removed t h i s t h r e a t . I n s e t t i n g up the i m p r o v i s a t i o n , I had hoped f o r a purely v e r b a l c o n t e s t . There was a l a c k of c o n t r o l i n r e s o r t i n g t o v i o l e n c e that was a mistake i n an a c t i n g s i t u a t i o n . An a c t o r uses h i s emotions, but i s not d r i v e n by them. However, success i n competing w i t h Rob improved h i s r e l a t i o n -s h i p w i t h him i n the play and i n general increased h i s a b i l i t y t o show emotion. H i s l a s t appeal f o r help t o Greta at the end of the act became much f r e e r and more open. He a l s o became the manipulative master of s i t u a t i o n s . The whole character began t o 99 enlarge i n the l a s t ten days. He moved away from the small voice and physique. I n h i s i n t e r v i e w he s a i d t h a t when he bagan t o move on stage and do any p h y s i c a l t h i n g , t h i s gave him a sense of what Cone was l i k e , as i f the p h y s i c a l helped t o b u i l d up the i m a g i n a t i v e . He f e l t any tendency t o f e e l awkward or 'phoney 1 w i t h l i n e s d i s -appeared as he concentrated more and more on what was happening i n the play and what was happening p h y s i c a l l y round him. H i s own aim i n a u n i t would become c l e a r e r the more he paid a t t e n t i o n t o what was going on both w i t h Cone and others. He moved f u r t h e r i n h i s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n than anyone e l s e , p a r t l y because he had s t a r t e d w i t h such a s l i g h t performance, but a l s o because he r e l i e d p r i m a r i l y on b e l i e f and imagination. For him there seemed t o be no other way of working. 7 . A t t i t u d e t o a t e x t D a n i e l d i d not have those d i f f i c u l t i e s of ' l i n e y ' d e l i v e r y , and going s t a l e on words, that Jan and Dan s t r u g g l e d w i t h . I n h i s i n t e r v i e w he s a i d h i s most tiresome t r o u b l e was w i t h speed: he could not slow down s u f f i c i e n t l y and f e l t Impelled t o go f a s t . This disappeared w i t h time and p r a c t i s e , and he could not e x p l a i n i t . L i k e Rob, h i s i m p r o v i s a t i o n s d i d not have a wide gap between them, as f a r as the voice went. He laboured under d i f f i c u l t i e s memorizing, and i t was a long time before he was f r e e of the s c r i p t . Once he knew the words he was able t o make them h i s own and i t may be that h i s t r o u b l e w i t h speed began t o disappear when he was able t o t r u s t h i s memory. He d i d not regard the t e x t 100 as an a u t h o r i t y t o be obeyed;, but succeeded i n t r a n s f e r r i n g t h a t a u t h o r i t y t o h i m s e l f . He had a much higher r e s i s t a n c e t o the •words of the t e x t s i n the o r a l readings, p a r t i c u l a r l y the f i r s t . 8. A b i l i t y t o reproduce sound r a t h e r than something merely v i s u a l D a n i e l d i d not s u f f e r from a •reading' q u a l i t y when a c t i n g , i n any acute or obvious form. I t was more tha t he would produce, at times, an utterance that was meaningless and l i f e l e s s , as i f the l i n e s were without sense. T y p i c a l of t h i s was the passage 27 where he s a i d , 'There's something about t h i s bloke...' and the l i n e s which immediately f o l l o w . For no c l e a r reason he could recover from t h i s and i n v e s t the part w i t h l i f e and p e r s o n a l i t y . The ensuing scene shows t h i s recovery. I n the run-through of the t h i r d week he was s t i l l f o l l o w i n g a tex t - i n - t h e - h e a d , probably from d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h memorizing, but by the end of the r e h e a r s a l period h i s voice had l o s t the l i f e l e s s v q u a l i t y (except i n the Fireworks U n i t ) . I t i s hard t o summarize D a n i e l ' s work, as he d i d not make l i n e a r progress but jumped i n t o l i f e unexpectedly w i t h a break-through that one could not p r e d i c t . Cassette 3 3 Side 1, ll*f« and p. 27 (Appendix E) 101 Use of the tapes which record Mike and Dan i n The Sport of My Mad Mother  Dan (Steve) 1. P a r t of h i s opening speech, p. 11, 12. F i r s t read-through: Cassette 3 S Side 1, 257*. 2. Opening speech, recorded at the beginning of the t h i r d week: Cassette L , Side 1, 6^'. 3. Opening speech, end of t h i r d week: Cassette L , Side 11, *+t. k. Opening speech, f o u r t h week: Cassette 5j Side 1, 2 8 l ' . Mike (Dean) 1. 'We'll now have a l i t t l e peace!', p. 36. Read-through: Cassette 3, Side 1, 22*f'. 2. Opening speech, p. 12, recorded at the beginning of the t h i r d week: Cassette ks Side 1, 80'. 3. Opening speech, end of t h i r d week: Cassette k3 Side 11, 31*. k. 'What i s t h i s ' . . . p. 29, end of t h i r d week: Cassette L , Side 11, 276'. 5. Opening speech, f o u r t h week: Cassette 5j Side 1, 312'. 102 Dan as Steve 1. Language f a c i l i t y . S e l f - e x p r e s s i o n In conversation Dan was able t o t a l k f l u e n t l y about himself and the p l a y , and had a f a i r vocabulary. 2. Eye-mouth c o o r d i n a t i o n He had no d i f f i c u l t y when reading aloud i n scanning ahead, and i n . t h e technique of voice production i n general he was p r o f i c i e n t and f a i r l y p r a c t i s e d . 3 • D i c t i o n He was always a u d i b l e and had a c l e a r c a r r y i n g voice of middle range. h. R e l a t i o n s h i p between voice and body He was somewhat p h y s i c a l l y uneasy on stage, though not o f f i t . He looked unrelaxed when he faced the audience standing, and was much e a s i e r when he sat on h i s s t o o l and began t o t r y out h i s percussion instruments. P r e v i o u s l y ha had been conscious of r i g i d i t y i n arms and hands. He was q u i t e aware of t h i s f e e l i n g , and t r i e d t o break through i t ; at the same time he was a l s o t r y i n g t o prevent himself from going s t a l e on h i s long speech. He f e l t t hat the p h y s i c a l unease and the l a c k of spontaneity i n the speech were r e a l l y one problem, not two. 5. A b i l i t y t o r e l a t e t o an audience 28 I n h i s i n t e r v i e w , the a c t o r s a i d t h a t he l i k e d the experience of speaking s t r a i g h t out t o the audience, though p h y s i c a l l y he d i d not r e a l l y seem easy. The part was an unusual one, not d i s -s i m i l a r from Thornton Wilder's Stage Manager, i n Our Town. Cassette 2, Side 11, 6 l f , and Appendix A, p.|(>0* 103 Apart from the demands i t made on the a c t o r f o r the appearance at l e a s t , of s o c i a b i l i t y and s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e , I t a l s o r e q u i r e d him t o develop the r o l e only through h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the spec-t a t o r s , and not through the other characters i n the p l a y , t o whom he r a r e l y speaks. Dan knew I n t e l l e c t u a l l y what the part needed, and what kind of person Steve was. But he was always conscious of l i n e s . H i s n a t u r a l endowment as an a c t o r , and the voice production he had a c q u i r e d , were c e r t a i n l y adequate f o r the t a s k . So t h i s was a problem of communication and confidence. Although he t r i e d t o keep an i n f o r m a l , easy manner by u s i n g paraphrases and i m p r o v i s a t i o n s i n r e h e a r s a l , the l i n e s s t i l l hardened i n t o a mould once he went back t o the t e x t . The same shape came out every time. This • l i n e y 1 , unspontaneous speech i n t u r n i n s u l a t e d him from the audience, and there was a transparent w a l l between them. He knew t h i s , and a l s o saw that the t r o u b l e was becoming aggravated as time went on, and h i s f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h the part i n -creased. I n f a c t , some of h i s e a r l y r e h e a r s a l s were f r e s h e r and more p o l i s h e d than the l a t e r ones. These d i f f i c u l t i e s were d i s -cussed i n h i s i n t e r v i e w 2 ^ , but n e i t h e r of us was able t o d i s c o v e r the r e a l cause. H i s a b i l i t y t o improvise w i t h enthusiasm and freshness has already been noted,3° and a p o s s i b l e p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r a c t i n g without spectators was considered ( t h i s , i f i t e x i s t e d was c e r t a i n l y not c o n s c i o u s ) . I t d i d seem l i k e l y t hat he found an audience more alarming than Mike d i d , and t h a t he was over-anxious t o please. Mike, on the other hand, was i n charge, as f a r •"Cassette 7* Side 1, 273' 30see page 6 l . 10k as the audience -was concerned, and t h e r e f o r e able t o be at ease. v. 6. A t t i t u d e t o a t e x t Words became set i n h i s head as a copy t o be f o l l o w e d . T h i s gave h i s work a s t a l e q u a l i t y that he could not e l i m i n a t e . He seemed under a compulsion t o obey t h i s t e x t - i n - t h e - h e a d . Was he h o l d i n g on to I t i n the face of spectators whom he viewed as h o s t i l e ? 7. A b i l i t y t o reproduce sound r a t h e r than something merely v i s u a l The a b i l i t y t o get away from learned l i n e s and produce spon-taneous sound was not a simple t h i n g f o r Dan. As has been noted, he had good n a t u r a l v o c a l q u a l i t i e s , and i n the e a r l y stages of r e h e a r s a l , h i s work was more spontaneous than i t subsequently became. The ' l l n e y 1 q u a l i t y c e r t a i n l y became worse as the per-formance approached. Addressing the audience w i t h t h i s long passage of casual remarks was a s t a r k t e s t of v o c a l spontaneity. F a i l u r e i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n would be more obvious than f a i l u r e i n a dialogue composed of s i n g l e l i n e s . One had t o admit i n the end, that any member of the audience would know tha t these l i n e s were le a r n e d , and not an impromptu chat t o s t a r t the play o f f , as the author c l e a r l y i n t e n d s . Mike as Dean 1. Language F a c i l i t y . S e l f - e x p r e s s i o n i n reading aloud He t a l k e d i n t e l l i g e n t l y about h i s work and the p l a y , but not f l u e n t l y . He always t r i e d t o speak a c c u r a t e l y and without v e r -biage. 2. Eye-mouth c o o r d i n a t i o n His reading aloud was accurate and he knew how t o scan ahead. 105 He was hampered by l a c k of p r a c t i s e , however, and spent the whole time i n making sense of the w r i t t e n m a t e r i a l . 3. D i c t i o n Mike was endowed w i t h a l i g h t voice of tenor range, but tended t o keep i t down. I t lacked b r i g h t tones, and he f r e -quently sounded monotonous, though u s u a l l y a u d i b l e . When he was s t i m u l a t e d i m a g i n a t i v e l y t o put something over t o the audience he achieved h i s g o a l , but t h i s d i d not happen through l u c i d speech technique. Technique improved through imaginative r e s -ponse t o the t e x t , i n h i s case. *f. R e l a t i o n s h i p between voice and body He was p h y s i c a l l y f a i r l y easy on stage, had presence, and r e l a x e d i n c r e a s i n g l y as r e h e a r s a l s progressed. H i s s l i g h t s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s w i t h arms and hands was p a r a l l e l e d i n h e s i -t a t i o n and d i f f i d e n c e i n the use of words and v o c a l tone. 5. A b i l i t y t o r e l a t e t o an audience The r o l e of Dean i s l e s s demanding than that of Steve w i t h respect t o the audience. H i s l i n e s are s h o r t e r than Steve's, and he i s much more an a c t i v e member of the east and l e s s of a compere. What the a c t o r p l a y i n g Dean has t o do i s t o convey the character's impression of the London s t r e e t scene, t o paint i t i n words. An a c t o r capable of v i s u a l i m a g i n a t i o n , as Mike was, would not f i n d t h i s very d i f f i c u l t . I n h i s i n t e r v i e w ^ 1 Mike s a i d he d i d not f i n d t a l k i n g t o the audience p a r t i c u l a r l y t e s t i n g , and he d i d not f a l l i n t o the ' l i n e y ' problems of Dan. H i s voice was o f t e n monotonous though, as i t was i n o r d i n a r y conversation. What he found hard, he s a i d , was f e e l i n g what kind of person Dean 31cassette 6, Side 11, 132', and Appendix A, P-«*47. 106 was, and reproducing i t . This seemed tru e from the observer's point of view. He had l i t t l e a c t i n g experience, and i n the e a r l y stages h i s voice was l e v e l and nervous. H i s development of the p a r t can be picked up on the tapes i f they are heard i n order of time. Once he began t o f e e l h i s way i n t o the c h a r a c t e r , the other q u a l i t i e s , such as the a b i l i t y t o confront the audience d i r e c t l y , came i n t o being a u t o m a t i c a l l y . Seeking f i r s t the i n n e r nature of the r o l e , he found the d e t a i l s were added spontaneously. For example, once he had seen c l e a r l y what kind of person Dean was, the speech where he reassures the audience a f t e r d i s t u r b i n g events have taken p l a c e , became s o l i d , r e l a x e d and convinced. He was not i n a subservient r e l a t i o n s h i p t o the audience, but i n c o n t r o l . The most d i f f i c u l t l i n e s were the f i r s t ones, when Dean i s used by the author t o create atmosphere and convey i n f o r m a t i o n . As time went on, a f t e r various t r i a l s , Mike developed a simple technique of j u s t t e l l i n g i t . I t may not even have been technique, but a d i r e c t communication of the scene as he saw i t i n h i s imagina-t i o n . He was able t o s m i l e , too, i n a genuine way at them, a t h i n g t h a t cannot e a s i l y be faked. So the performance developed from h e s i t a n t beginnings t o something s o l i d , the c r e a t i o n of a d e f i n i t e r o l e . Mike was i n some ways l i k e D a n i e l , i n that he lacked t r a i n -i n g and technique — he had much l e s s a c t u a l t r a i n i n g than D a n i e l — but e v e n t u a l l y overcame t h i s through imaginative s t i m u l u s , mostly s e l f - a d m i n i s t e r e d . 107 6. A t t i t u d e t o a Text When Mike began work on h i s p a r t , he constructed a biography f o r i t . He worked out the past and the present of Dean, e x t r a -p o l a t i n g from the t e x t . S t a n i s l a v s k i had suggested to h i s students that the c o n s t r u c t i o n of such a biography could be of great a s s i s t a n c e i n the c r e a t i o n of a r o l e . But w i t h Mike, h i s own v e r s i o n of the character's past s t i l l remained i n t e l l e c t u a l , and both the play i t s e l f and h i s v e r s i o n of the part continued to be e x t e r n a l , and appreciated only w i t h the i n t e l l i g e n c e . He f e l t himself t o be i n a subservient r e l a t i o n s h i p t o the t e x t , and h i s d i f f i c u l t i e s were only r e s o l v e d when he l e t h i s f e e l i n g s take over. There i s no way of avoiding t a k i n g over the part from the pl a y w r i g h t , however p a i n f u l t h i s o f t e n seems to be. Mike e v e n t u a l l y succeeded i n doing t h i s , l e s s by a conscious e f f o r t of the i n t e l l i g e n c e than by r e l a x i n g i n t o i t , r e l a t i n g t o o t h e r s , and r e p l a c i n g the t e x t w i t h an inner imaginative p i c t u r e of what was going on. 7. A b i l i t y t o reproduce sound r a t h e r than something merely v i s u a l There i s nothing much t o add here, except t o u n d e r l i n e the f a c t that Mike sounded sincere and spontaneous when he was i m a g i n a t i v e l y i n s p i r e d . L i k e D a n i e l , he d i d not f a l l back on technique. However, the a c q u i r i n g of technique should not be ignored. I f Mike wanted to continue on stage, he would be w e l l advised t o gain c o n s c i o u s l y a greater v o c a l range and more c l e a r l y defined consonants. 108 I n summarizing the work of these students, some th i n g s stand out, w h i l e others need f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n . Rob was an able a c t o r i n the making; able enough, i n my o p i n i o n , t o become p r o f e s s i o n a l , i f he so d e s i r e d . He had a s t r o n g , e x t r o v e r t e d p e r s o n a l i t y , and was competent i n approach-in g a r o l e , and r e l i a b l e . He gave a f a i t h f u l rendering of Fak, and a v i v i d one. H i s successes appeared to depend on two f a c t o r s : b e l i e f i n a given s i t u a t i o n , and s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e . The f i r s t of these l e d t o the second. Without b e l i e f , he blustered or used v o c a l technique as a cover-up. He had a good command of h i s voice and could do t h i s e a s i l y . But the cover-up was not convincing. He d i d not b e l i e v e i n the s i t u a t i o n i n The Rainmaker. The Sport  of My Mad Mother, which he already knew, appealed t o h i s imagina-t i o n and he could commit himself t o the environment of the play c o n f i d e n t l y and without s t r a i n . He d i d not have the text-in-the-head problems t h a t some ex-perienced, and knew that he had t o take charge of the part sooner or l a t e r . He showed signs of f r u s t r a t i o n when t h i s d i d not happen as f a s t as he might wi s h , and got i n t e n s e l y i r r i t a t e d i f h i s memory f a i l e d i n r e h e a r s a l . He was more nervous than ap-peared at f i r s t and d i s l i k e d the tape recorder more than any-one e l s e . He was much aware of i t s presence. He needed to- develop a c a p a c i t y t o n o t i c e q u i t e c l e a r l y what other a c t o r s were doing, as w e l l as h i m s e l f . As i t was, he cut himself o f f at times from the o t h e r s , and a l s o t r e a t e d h i s longer speeches as i s o l a t e d performances. He seemed t o f e e l , i n these performances, that something s p e c i a l was expected of him. 1 0 9 -Jan, i n her i n t e r v i e w s a i d she might have p r e f e r r e d t o play-Dodo. She thought i t would be d i f f e r e n t and f u n . Although she d i d not enlarge on t h i s , i t was expressed as a r e a l preference. A p o s s i b l e reason f o r t h i s might be t h a t Dodo i s n e i t h e r aggres-s i v e nor v i n d i c t i v e w h i l e P a t t y i s both. She found th a t aggres-s i o n q u i t e d i f f i c u l t and speaks about her problems at some l e n g t h . Otherwise, w e l l when we were i n t e r p r e t i n g the anger scene as sort of s t r a i g h t loud anger r a t h e r than sarcasm, or s o r t of a s a r c a s t i c anger — I was j u s t at a l o s s as to g e t t i n g v a r i a t i o n i n t o a loud angry anger and that v o c a l l y , too. But when we moved i n t o a more c y n i c a l t h i n g , I f e l t e a s i e r w i t h i t . . . . I t got e a s i e r and I could understand i t more again when i t got i n t o the s a r c a s t i c c o n t r o l l e d kind of t h i n g but I found the l e s s c o n t r o l l e d anger very hard.32 Jan made i n t e l l i g e n t and i n t e r e s t i n g remarks about the play which p a r a l l e l her f e e l i n g s about the r o l e . She a t t r i b u t e d t o the author the view th a t v i o l e n c e can break out at any time i n t h i s group, and a l s o i n other groups, and went on t o say: 'That's a dangerous f e e l i n g t o be t h i n k i n g about; you don't r e a l l y want t o admit t h a t . ' 3 3 Her l a c k of commitment t o the p a r t , at l e a s t where P a t t y expresses 'dangerous f e e l i n g s ' , might have ro o t s i n t h i s more general response t o the play as a whole. I t was c e r t a i n l y t r u e t h a t the gang can become almost murderous on l i t t l e p r o v o c a t i o n . The main c h a r a c t e r s , i n c l u d i n g P a t t y , have a love of excitement. The excitement i s always showing signs of running out, so a new See Appendix A, p. 15"^  See Appendix A, p. I.JvTl e f f o r t has t o be made t o keep i t going. The excitement -was not always innocent, o f t e n mysterious, and always d i s t u r b i n g . Jan p o s s i b l y had the same ki n d of r e s i s t a n c e t o being unpleasant t h a t 3 If Jeanine showed more ob v i o u s l y when p l a y i n g i n The A p p l i c a n t . And t h i s may have been the cause of her, r e s i s t a n c e t o Patty's v i o l e n t emotions. I t was s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t , when speaking of the r o l e , she used the word 'understand' much more o f t e n than • f e l t ' , e s p e c i a l l y when t a l k i n g about emotion. This was how she approached the p a r t , t r y i n g t o express f e e l i n g through under-standing i t i n t e l l e c t u a l l y . She a l s o made an a u t h o r i t y out of the s c r i p t . She learned i t s c r u p u l o u s l y e a r l y on, and although she r a r e l y needed i t i n the hand, i t remained f i r m l y i n the head as an i n s t r u c t o r t o be obeyed. A l l t h i s was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the 'reading' q u a l i t y t h a t was n o t i c e a b l e i n her work, and o f t e n s p o i l e d an otherwise promising performance. I suspected t h a t i f she were cast f o r a more sym-p a t h e t i c and l e s s d e s t r u c t i v e r o l e than e i t h e r of the two pa r t s she played during the p r o j e c t , the 'reading' q u a l i t y would be much diminished, and t h a t she would give a s a t i s f y i n g and p l e a s -i n g performance. D a n i e l came through w i t h a performance of Cone tha t was accurate, and, at times, f i r s t r a t e . The e s s e n t i a l q u a l i t y of r a t h e r nasty power-seeking was adumbrated i f not u n d e r l i n e d . Cone b o l s t e r s h i s power by never e x p l a i n i n g anything, which leaves the gang puzzled and nervous. D a n i e l conveyed t h i s very w e l l . 3hSee p. 35. I l l H i s greatest d i f f i c u l t y was i n the area of p r o j e c t i o n — he p r o j e c t e d the part on a very s m a l l s c a l e , at l e a s t u n t i l the i m p r o v i s a t i o n i n c i d e n t . I n h i s a u d i t i o n , when he read The Stage Manager from Our Town, he barely projected himself at a l l ; though what he d i d , i f enlarged, would have been q u i t e s a t i s f a c t o r y . He d i d not produce a 'reading' q u a l i t y or i n s i n c e r e tone, but a small voice w i t h almost no tone, and c e r t a i n l y one l a c k i n g i n any s o r t of d r i v e or edge. A f t e r the i m p r o v i s a t i o n there was a marked change, which mostly stayed w i t h him. He needed a good dea l of support from a d i r e c t o r . D a n i e l d i d not know that he was i n a u d i b l e , nor d i d he know th a t he p r o j e c t e d himself on a small s c a l e . I n other words, he lacked t h a t inner c r i t i c or observer t h a t u s u a l l y operates i n a c t o r s . One comment on the i m p r o v i s a t i o n t h a t he made was i l-l u m i n a t i n g . A f t e r he had s a i d t h a t i t r e a l l y helped him to. f e e l s u p e r i o r t o Fak, as he i s supposed t o be, he went on: ' I t was -te-the wildness of i t a l l . I didn't r e a l l y know what I was doing.•' J y The i m p r o v i s a t i o n was terminated at the point t h a t i t became apparent that Dan was a c t i n g out deep f e e l i n g s o r i g i n a t i n g at an unconscious l e v e l . To have proceeded f u r t h e r would have brought no a d d i t i o n a l b e n e f i t t o h i s subsequent performance and exposed him t o u n j u s t i f i a b l e r i s k s . There i s a very t h i n l i n e d i v i d i n g i m p r o v i s a t i o n from psychodrama, and i t must not be crossed. I f i t becomes apparent, as happened i n Dan's case, that the a c t o r has a c c i d e n t a l l y crossed i t , he must be l e d back i n t o s a f e t y . Psycho-drama i s a very powerful t h e r a p e u t i c technique f o r reaching See Appendix A, p./5S 112 otherwise i n a c c e s s i b l e l e v e l s of the mind, and a b s o l u t e l y r e -q u i r e s the s u p e r v i s i o n of an experienced t h e r a p i s t . The power of the childhood f e e l i n g s evoked and released by psychodrama i s so intense t h a t i t can overwhelm the defences of the ego, and induce psychotic breakdown. Obviously i m p r o v i s a t i o n and psychodrama have something i n common: the d i s i n h i b i t i o n of f e e l i n g (though the f e e l i n g s released normally i n i m p r o v i s a t i o n are f a r l e s s i n t e n s e ) . Psychodrama, a f t e r a l l , r e f e r s t o the p a t i e n t ' s r e a l l i f e s i t u a -t i o n . I f , by chance, as happened i n the case of D a n i e l , a deep h o s t i l i t y i s r e l e a s e d , the a c t o r l o s e s c o n t r o l , and i n e v i t a b l y parts company w i t h h i s h i g h l y necessary Inner c r i t i c . What might be appropriate i n a t h e r a p e u t i c s i t u a t i o n i s t o t a l l y i n -appropriate i n the t r a i n i n g of a c t o r s . I n the event D a n i e l was b e n e f i t t e d . He d i d not go too f a r i n t o the psychodrama, and he could q u i c k l y be r e c a l l e d from i t . He tapped aggression whose r e p r e s s i o n had p r e v i o u s l y been pre-venting him from p l a y i n g the r o l e of Cone. However, t h i s was a kind of a c c i d e n t a l therapy f o r him, and r e a l l y had very l i t t l e t o do w i t h a c t i n g , which i n v o l v e s s k i l l and an a t t e n t i v e inner observer of the scene. Da n i e l ' s remark, quoted above, i s not an a c t o r ' s remark. There i s a s t o r y about a nineteenth century E n g l i s h a c t o r , Frank Benson, which i l l u s t r a t e s what can happen on stage when the observer w i t h i n i s obscured. Benson was a famous Richard I I . One night he was much moved during the performance and wept c o p i o u s l y . He t o l d a f r i e n d who had witnessed the play t h a t n i g h t , 113 t h a t he considered t h a t he had given a p a r t i c u l a r l y moving p e r f o r -mance. But the f r i e n d demurred and t o l d the ac t o r t h a t he had been so overwhelmed by the pathos of the s i t u a t i o n he was i n , that he had l o s t s i g h t of Richard and the kind of person he was. 37 D a n i e l p r e f e r r e d Improvising t o working w i t h a s c r i p t . One could not help suspecting that h i s r e a l d e s i r e was d i r e c t e d towards a romantic freedom, i n which t o act out emotion. This i s not the same t h i n g as a c t i n g , however important a v a i l a b l e emotion may be t o an a c t o r . H i s l a c k of an inner c r i t i c was s e r i o u s , since i t prevented him from p r o j e c t i n g the r o l e on a s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e s c a l e , and i n other ways kept him unaware of the e f f e c t he was c r e a t i n g . Dan and Mike contrasted w i t h each other i n the way that they r e l a t e d t o an audience. Mike overcame any vo c a l reading q u a l i t y and t o some extent the l e v e l tones of v o i c e , once he had estab-l i s h e d , t o h i s own s a t i s f a c t i o n , who he was. Dan on the other hand d i d not succeed i n becoming spontaneous once the l i n e s had gone s t a l e . Perhaps he never i d e n t i f i e d w i t h h i s p a r t . What d i d i t mean t o r e l a t e t o the audience? Obviously i t i s d i f f e r e n t from r e l a t i n g t o another act o r on stage. The audience does not r e p l y , although i t does respond. But compared w i t h the other a c t o r , i t i s pa s s i v e . T a l k i n g t o an audience i s a l s o d i f f e r e n t from s o l i l o q u i z i n g — and t h i s d i f f e r e n c e was not 3^1 have be^n unable t o t r a c e t h i s s t o r y , but Cf. The Art of the A c t o r , by C. Coquelin, London, A l l e n and Unwin, 1932. He i n s i s t s throughout the book on the two f u n c t i o n s of the .actor, the per-former and the c r i t i c a l observer. 37 See Appendix A, p./Z^l . always c l e a r i n Dan's performance. Hamlet does not di s c u s s w i t h  the audience whether i t i s b e t t e r t o be or not t o be. He i s not asking t h e i r o p i n i o n . Steve does share, h i s views and opinions w i t h the audiences and I t would not, i n f a c t , be s u r p r i s i n g i f a member of the audience r e p l i e d t o him. This reaching out eluded Dan who kept up the transparent w a l l t h a t has already been men-t i o n e d . Steve's r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the audience i s c l o s e t o that of a comedian c h a t t i n g t o them, and, of course, i m p r o v i s i n g what he has t o say. Steve had t o give the impression of improvising w h i l e a c t u a l l y having l i n e s , and p l e n t y of them. The ac t o r ' s t a s k was then a hard one. Dan's inner c r i t i c was at work on h i s problems and he s a i d i n h i s i n t e r v i e w ^ t h a t he could hear the d i f f e r e n c e i n h i s voice between the occasions when he was Im-p r o v i s i n g and when he was speaking from a t e x t . The f o l l o w i n g remarks were i n t e r e s t i n g too, w i t h regard t o h i s f e e l i n g s about working on a p l a y : • I t i s r e a l l y hard t o take something t h a t ' s already w r i t t e n down, because i t ' s not n a t u r a l , which makes the biggest d i f f e r e n c e , because what you're saying i n an improv., even though i t ' s a d i f f e r e n t character t h a t you're t r y i n g t o get, i t ' s s t i l l coming out of your head, and so i t ' s s t i l l going t o be n a t u r a l f o r you t o say t h a t . Yet w i t h the t e x t i t ' s something that somebody e l s e had w r i t t e n and somebody e l s e has s a i d and f o r you t o say t h a t i n a. n a t u r a l way takes a b i t of work.'39 There was a and h i s work on marked contrast w i t h Dan i n h i s improvised work the p l a y . With Mike there was f a r l e s s d i f f e r e n c e , - N O • See Appendix A, p. 162.. J 7 S e e Appendix A, p. /£3 . 115 I t -was Mike who was more s u c c e s s f u l i n r e l a t i n g t o h i s audience, and who could t h e r e f o r e take a t e x t and make i t h i s own. He s a i d t h i s i n h i s i n t e r v i e w , where he i n s i s t e d t h a t at f i r s t he di d n ' t know what kind of person Dean was; and then as r e h e a r s a l s pro-gressed I t became c l e a r e r and c l e a r e r . ; The r o l e , i n ofeher words, r e a l l y became h i s , and no longer the author's. That so f a r as I could judge was the d i f f e r e n c e between t h e i r performances. Dan remained a pr i s o n e r of the t e x t , and only f e l t f r e e when im-p r o v i s i n g . 116 Chapter *f. Conclusion The t h e s i s set out t o examine d i f f e r i n g v o c a l responses of young ac t o r s t o a t e x t . Emphasis was l a i d on the contrast bet-ween unspontaneous q u a l i t y , and a f r e s h , f r e e approach t o a p l a y . I n the course of the i n v e s t i g a t i o n i t came t o l i g h t t h a t c l e a r d i c t i o n and a u d i b i l i t y were no guarantee that the 'reading 1 q u a l i t y might not a l s o be present. Conversely, I t was a l s o t r u e t h a t people whose speech technique was poor, c o u l d , nonetheless, be spontaneous and f r e s h i n t h e i r approach t o a r o l e . This i s not t o advocate the view t h a t a l a c k of technique i s h e l p f u l t o an a c t o r , or t h a t t r a i n i n g s p o i l s f r e s h n e s s , which I do not b e l i e v e , but that something more than good d i c t i o n i s needed i f spontaneity i s t o be forthcoming. Nor i s i t h e l p f u l t o advocate what i s simply n a t u r a l . There i s nothing n a t u r a l about being on a stage, as Hoffman and Cameron point out f o r c i b l y i n t h e i r book, The  T h e a t r i c a l Response. 1 They do say, however, When Hamlet advises the players t o "hold the m i r r o r up t o nature', he i s not c a l l i n g f o r exact reproduction of human behaviour, but f o r honesty i n the a r t i s t i c r eproduction of. l i f e . 2 A f a i l u r e t o produce t h i s honesty shows i n the v o i c e , though i t may take d i f f e r e n t forms w i t h d i f f e r e n t people. As the work continued, some causes emerged t o account f o r the responses, and these should now be considered: " I don't want t o be a b i t c h / b a s t a r d . " We have already noted Jeanine's marked r e s i s t a n c e t o being Kenneth M. Cameron and Theodore J . C. Hoffman, The T h e a t r i c a l  Response, London, the Macmillan Company, 1969. See e s p e c i a l l y the s e c t i o n , " A r t i f i c i a l " and " N a t u r a l " A c t i n g , pp. 252-255. 2 I b i d . . p. 253-117 unpleasant, as the -woman i n Harold P i n t e r ' s sketch. The Applicant- 3. Jan had s i m i l a r problems w i t h the r o l e of P a t t y . Both sounded unspontaneous, as i f speaking learned l i n e s . What d i d t h i s mean? Robert B e n e d i t t i , i n t r o d u c i n g h i s book on a c t i n g , points out the r e l a t i o n s h i p between a c t i n g i n r e a l l i f e and.acting on stage: The a c t i v i t y of r o l e - p l a y i n g i s not unique t o the stage a c t o r . I t i s one of the common and necessary a c t i v i t i e s of everyday s o c i a l l i f e . As you begin developing y o u r s e l f as a stage ! a c t o r , you w i l l f i n d t h a t a great de a l of your s k i l l as a s o c i a l actor w i l l be u s e f u l . You are probably already more s k i l f u l at pro-j e c t i n g a s e m i - f i c t i t i o u s c h a r a c t e r i s a t i o n t o an audience than you might t h i n k . Around the t u r n of the century, the psy-c h o l o g i s t W i l l i a m James suggested that our p e r s o n a l i t y i s a complex s t r u c t u r e c o n s i s t i n g of an " I " and s e v e r a l "me's". Each of us has a good many r o l e s or "me's" which we play i n vari o u s s i t u a t i o n s . Your r o l e s as son or daughter, as student or employee, and so on, a l i c a l l upon you t o modify your behaviour at d i f f e r e n t times, t o present y o u r s e l f d i f f e r e n t l y . Your sense of i d e n t i t y , your " I " , i s your sense of continuous i d e n t i t y , which l i e s behind these various performances and t i e s them together i n t o one p e r s o n a l i t y . I f you have been forced t o perform two d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l r o l e s at once ( v i s i t s by parents t o t h e i r c h i l d r e n at c o l l e g e o f t e n occasion such uncomfortable s i t u a t i o n s ) you know how r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t some of our "me's" can be t o each other. Our s a n i t y depends i n part on keeping our various -^me1 s" i n t h e i r proper p l a c e s , and hold i n g on t o a strong sense of " I " . He goes on t o say tha t "our s k i l l as s o c i a l actors gives us a f i r m foundation on w h i c h 0 t o b u i l d . " I have quoted at l e n g t h because the connection between a c t i n g JSee p. 35. k Robert B e n e d i t t i , The Actor at Work. New Jers e y , P r e n t i c e - H a l l •Inc., 1970. : , " 118 i n l i f e and a c t i n g on stage i s important, but i n a more negative •way than B e n e d i t t i suggests. I s a c t i n g s o c i a l l y always the advan-tage he a f f i r m s ? The -words "forced t o perform" are d i s q u i e t i n g , and c a r r y i m p l i c a t i o n s that should be looked a t . A c t i n g i n r e a l l i f e i s , i n f a c t , compulsive and imposed by heavy c o n d i t i o n i n g . We are taught t o perform acceptable s o c i a l r o l e s f i r s t by parents and then by t e a c h e r s , p o s s i b l y by p r i e s t s or m i n i s t e r s as w e l l . We are brought t o a s t a t e of mind which s o c i e t y hopes w i l l be a u s e f u l one, enabling us t o f u n c t i o n w e l l w i t h i n i t s c o n f i n e s . And ' c o n f i n e s 1 i s r i g h t . Since the heaviest part of the c o n d i t i o n i n g c o n s i s t s i n an emphasis on "goodness" (pleasing other people, Working hard, not l o s i n g your temper, and agreeing w i t h parents on r e l i g i o n and sex, and so on) i t becomes i n t o l e r a b l e t o the person thus conditioned t h a t he should have, s t i l l l e s s express, 'bad' f e e l i n g s , w i t h the r e s u l t that he buries them. Anyone programmed i n t h i s way e i t h e r remains 'good' and behaves ' n i c e l y ' (and i n c i d e n t a l l y becomes a h y p o c r i t e , a word e t y m o l o g i c a l l y connected 5 w i t h a c t i n g ) or r e b e l s and becomes delinquent or 'bad'. I n e i t h e r case these performances are t i e d t o the o r i g i n a l c o n d i t i o n -i n g . The only way of escape i s t o f i n d the " I " suggested by W i l l i a m James i n the q u o t a t i o n . The " I " i s n e i t h e r good nor bad, and does not perform. I t j u s t i s,. The 'good' person who goes on the stage may be cast f o r a part which comes i n t o sharp c o n f l i c t w i t h the r o l e he i s already 1 p l a y i n g i n everyday l i f e . I n t h i s case the a c t o r w i l l t r y t o impose -L i d d e l l and S c o t t , Greek Lex i c o n . Oxford, The Clarendon P r e s s , 1958. They give f o r hupokrites: one who plays a part ... an a c t o r ; and a dissembler, f e i g n e r , h y p o c r i t e : New Testament. 119 the r o l e i n the play on top of the r o l e of everyday l i f e , which he dares not abandon. This i s experienced as s t r a i n , e s p e c i a l l y s i n c e the s o c i a l r o l e w i l l f o r c e him t o please the d i r e c t o r , i n s t e a d of r e l a t i n g immediately t o the p a r t . I s the experience of s o c i a l r o l e - p l a y i n g , then, always such an advantage as B e n e d i t t i suggests? I s n ' t the a c t o r who i s p l a y i n g t h e " r o l e of a 'good' person i n l i f e , l i m i t e d t o those p a r t s where he expresses only p o s i t i v e f e e l i n g s ? A good person i s going t o have a hard time i f cast as anyone c r u e l and unpleasant or hot-tempered and u n c o n t r o l l e d . An a c t r e s s who wants t o play Hedda Gabler must at l e a s t admit the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t one of the "me's" i s vengeful and d e s t r u c t i v e . This p a r t i c u l a r block i n a c t i n g I s o f t e n overcome, not by the a c t o r , but by the c a s t i n g d i r e c t o r . Such ac t o r s are always cast f o r more or l e s s sympathetic parts w i t h whom they can i d e n t i f y without f e e l i n g threatened. There i s no r e a l s o l u t i o n f o r the a c t o r i n t h i s . He must d e a l w i t h h i s s i t u a t i o n more d r a s t i c a l l y , i f he wants t o be v e r s a t i l e . The goodness block w i l l o f t e n prevent b e l i e f i n a given s i t u a t i o n as w e l l . The a c t o r may f e e l "Wo one ever behaves l i k e t h a t " or "I've never met w i t h a s i t u a t i o n l i k e t h i s i n a l l my l i f e . " T h i s was a l s o a problem f o r Jan, and her remarks about the play as 6 a whole are i n t e r e s t i n g at t h i s point . The s i t u a t i o n of the play was accepted i n t e l l e c t u a l l y as a p o s s i b l e one, but not r e l a t e d t o any personal knowledge or experience. See Appendix A, pp./5"o~l5"l 120 The text and authority. "I want to do -what i s written down here. I can r e l a t e to that." This attitude arises where an actor c l i n g s to his s c r i p t and treats i t as an authority. Sometimes he does t h i s with the d i r -ector as w e l l , and t r i e s to extract a l l that he must imagine and project from the d i r e c t o r instead of from himself. While the d i r e c t o r may, i n a general way, t e l l the actor how he sees a char-acter, his view must become the actor's or there w i l l be no act of creation on the actor's part. C r e a t i v i t y needs freedom. Often an actor does not r e a l l y want that freedom; he does not want to transfer the authority either from the d i r e c t o r or from the text. I t was Dan who seemed most troubled at t h i s point. He was t i e d down by the text and could not make i t his own. I t Is not possible f o r the actor to extract the character i n a given play from anybody except himself. An analogous s i t u a t i o n comes about when a dir e c t o r has to produce a play. The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n has to be h i s , or i t w i l l be v i s i t e d by the angel of death. There i s a f a s c i n a t i n g account of Peter Brook's approach to the movie he 7 made of King Lear i n The New York Review of Books. Brook decided not to accept the huge reputation of the play on other people's say-so. He asked Ted Hughes, the poet, to translate the l i n e s into present-day E n g l i s h . When t h i s was completed, he com-pared the t r a n s l a t i o n with the o r i g i n a l , and on the basis of his own response perceived that Shakespeare's text was better, a view Frank Kermode, "Shakespeare i n the Movies", The New York Review  of Books. Vo l . XVIII, No. 8, May M-th, 1972, p. T o \ "~* 121 that Hughes a l s o shared. The a r t i c l e continues: The important t h i n g i s not simply t o have known t h i s as 'everybody' does, but t o have seen the need to work f o r the knowledge. Thenceforth the d i r e c t o r saw the whole play and i t s verse d i f f e r e n t l y . His sense of i t s power, i t s un-matched f o r c e was... no longer merely a func-t i o n of what people c o n v e n t i o n a l l y say about i t . So that whatever e l s e he might do, he would always operate„according t o t h i s luminous c o n v i c t i o n . " This i s the a t t i t u d e e s s e n t i a l a l s o t o c r e a t i n g a r o l e . I f the s c r i p t i s not seen through the a c t o r ' s own eyes, but through those of playwright or d i r e c t o r , the r e s u l t i n g performance w i l l be l i f e l e s s . One part of i t w i l l be the 'reading' q u a l i t y noted i n connection w i t h Dan's p o r t r a y a l of Steve. The r e f u s a l t o t r a n s -f e r a u t h o r i t y t o oneself i n a c t i n g a r o l e may account f o r the development of that s p e c i a l Shakespearean v o i c e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n England, where t h i s playwright i s apt to become a deeply resented, sacred f a t h e r - f i g u r e . The v o i c e , i n a l l i t s v a r i e t i e s , i s q notably parodied by the Beyond the F r i n g e team. y Laurence O l i v i e r , s u c c e s s f u l l y t a k i n g a u t h o r i t y out of the hands of Shakespeare and i n t o h i s own, was able t o part company w i t h the v o i c e , and introduce what he has c a l l e d r e a l i s m i n Shakespearean a c t i n g ; by making the playwright's words h i s own, he has restored t h e i r meaning. B e l i e f and Unbelief Several times i n the course of a n a l y z i n g the work of the 8 I b i d . . p. 20 ^Beyond the F r i n g e , recorded by C a p i t o l Records. W 1792, Side 2, "So That's The Way You L i k e I t . " 122 students, a l a c k of b e l i e f or c o n v i c t i o n has been mentioned: Rob i n h i s scene from The Rainmaker. 1 0 Jan i n hers from The Dutchman. 1 1 12 Dan i n h i s -work on Steve i n The Sport of My Mad Mother, a l l at times were working on t h e i r r o l e s without a sense of who or where they were. This i s not easy t o p i n down. I t a f f e c t e d everybody i n the p l a y at d i f f e r e n t stages of t h e i r development during the r e h e a r s a l p e r i o d . What i s meant by b e l i e f ? Careless d e f i n i t i o n i s d e t r i m e n t a l here. One sometimes gets the impression t h a t a c t o r s t h i n k t h a t they are supposed t o b e l i e v e t o t a l l y that they are someone e l s e , w i t h that person's environment. People who t o t a l l y b e l i e v e t h a t they are Napoleon are u s u a l l y regarded as having a serious mental i l l n e s s . C l e a r l y t h i s i s not what i s meant. The b u i l d i n g up of a r o l e i n t o an e n t i t y t h a t c a r r i e s c o n v i c t i o n t o an audience r e s t s on a s u p p o s i t i o n l i k e t h i s : I f I were Napoleon, what would I do? This i s the s t a r t i n g point from which everything e l s e i s created. An ac t o r i n t h i s way demonstrates what he would do. He ^ knows he i s an a c t o r , and not Napoleon, j u s t as a member of the audience knows tha t he i s s i t t i n g In the t h e a t r e , watching a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of l i f e , and not a c t u a l l i f e . This i s not t o say t h a t the act o r demonstrates c o l d l y or t h a t the audience watches unmoved, f o r t h a t would not be a s u c c e s s f u l demonstration or tr u e response. For the demonstration t o succeed, the act o r has t o use _ l 0 S e e pp.31 and3^. i : LSee p. £1 . See p.103. 123 h i s own emotions t o the f u l l . S t a n i s l a v s k i used h i s now famous formula of the magie i f I were so and so and i n t h i s set of circumstances, what would I do? There i s a good example of t h i s i n the chapter on Ik Imagination , where the D i r e c t o r , Tortsov, i s i n dialogue w i t h the drama student, P a u l . The D i r e c t o r says, "... I suggest that you, P a u l , are l i v i n g the l i f e of a t r e e . " "Good," s a i d P a u l w i t h d e c i s i o n , " I am an age-old oak t r e e . However, even though I have s a i d i t , I don't r e a l l y b e l i e v e i t ! " " In that case," suggested the D i r e c t o r , "why don't you say t o y o u r s e l f : 'I am I ; but i f I were an o l d oak, set i n c e r t a i n surrounding c o n d i t i o n s , what would I do? 1 and decide where you a r e , i n a f o r e s t , i n a meadow., on a moun- ,^ t a i n top; i n whatever place a f f e c t s you most." 7 This t r e e f a n t a s y then grows and becomes more complicated. Paul's imagination i s sparked o f f u n t i l he reaches the point where he i s not only a t r e e growing i n a f i e l d , but a l s o i n a h i s t o r i c a l context. The t r e e e x i s t s i n the f e u d a l period i n a complex environment i n v o l v i n g Dukes, Barons and mediaeval warfare, The D i r e c t o r points out at the end that even a passive theme such as t h i s can produce an inner stimulus and challenge t o ac-t i o n . Once the magic i f has been absorbed i n t o the imag i n a t i o n , a step-by-step process of c r e a t i v i t y becomes p o s s i b l e . This p s y c h o l o g i c a l technique s t a r t s w i t h the conscious, a c t i v e i n t e l l i g e n c e and uses i t , e v e n t u a l l y p e n e t r a t i n g below the mind's surface t o the springs of c r e a t i v i t y and the e l u s i v e • ^ S t a n i s l a v s k i , An Actor Prepares, pp. k3-k9. l ^ I b i d . , pp. 51-67. 1 ^ I b i d . . p. 61. 12k f e e l i n g s . I f the motiv a t i o n of character i s c o n s c i o u s l y explored, i n the most d e t a i l e d -way, and images and a s s o c i a t i o n b u i l t up w i t h -i n each u n i t , then sooner or l a t e r the appropriate c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n and f e e l i n g s w i l l of themselves emerge. S t a n i s l a v s k i was deeply opposed t o a d i r e c t approach t o emotion. On the stage there cannot be, under any circum-stances, a c t i o n that i s d i r e c t e d immediately at the arousing of a f e e l i n g f o r i t s own sake.... When you are choosing some b i t of a c t i o n , leave f e e l i n g and s p i r i t u a l content alone.... A l l such f e e l i n g s are the r e s u l t of something th a t has gone before. Of the t h i n g t h a t goes before you should t h i n k as hard as you can. ,^ As f o r the r e s u l t , i t w i l l produce i t s e l f . . . . About the content of 'what has gone before' he speaks i n the next chapter: During every moment we are on the stage, during every moment of the development of the a c t i o n of the p l a y , we must be aware e i t h e r of the e x t e r n a l circumstances which surround us (the whole m a t e r i a l s e t t i n g of the p r o d u c t i o n ) , or of an inner chain of circumstances which we ourselves have imagined i n order t o i l l u s t r a t e our p a r t s . Out of these moments w i l l be formed an unbroken s e r i e s of images, something l i k e a moving p i c t u r e . As long as we are a c t i n g c r e a t i v e l y , t h i s f i l m w i l l u n r o l l and be thrown on the screen of our inner v i s i o n , making v i v i d the circumstances among which we are moving. Moreover, these inner images create a co r -responding mood, and arouse emotions, while,„ holdi n g us w i t h i n the l i m i t s of the play. ' This was the area i n which Rob was weakest. He t r i e d t o get at the emotions of Fak by t a c k l i n g them d i r e c t l y . He s a i d himself I b i d . , p. 38 . 1 7 I b i d . , p. 60. t h a t he enjoyed the t e x t u r e of words, and while t h i s a p p r e c i a t i o n i s necessary i n a c t i n g , i t i s a l s o a t r a p i f i t means stopping at the surface l e v e l , which i s an easy t h i n g t o do. I t was par-t i c u l a r l y easy i n h i s case because he had a n a t u r a l g i f t f o r speech which seemed at f i r s t t o deceive him i n t o t h i n k i n g that he had achieved the character and emotions long before he had. L i k e Tortsov's own students, he began at the end, and t r i e d t o d e l i v e r the f i n i s h e d product before b u i l d i n g the inner s t r u c t u r e . H i s own sense of the exaggerated a t t i t u d e s he was t a k i n g up ev e n t u a l l y drove him back towards the c r e a t i o n of a subtext, and t h i s meant a more su b t l e examination of Fak's aim and manipula-t i o n s . He needed i n gener a l , when he undertook a r o l e , much more concent r a t i o n on the s t i m u l a t i o n of h i s imagination, and l e s s on e x t e r n a l s . I t was i n the nature of a paradox th a t the more i n t r o v e r t e d D a n i e l found i t h e l p f u l t o concentrate on.his surroun-dings and the other a c t o r s , w h i l e Rob, more e x t r o v e r t e d , had t h i s need t o create a subtext i n some d e t a i l , i n order t o make Fak con v i n c i n g . The passage I have quoted where S t a n i s l a v s k i speaks of the 'unbroken s e r i e s of images' i s h i g h l y r e l e v a n t t o the previous s e c t i o n on the v i c t i m s of tex t - i n - t h e - h e a d . The t e x t can be re p l a c e d , and here personal experience bears on the problem. I t i n v o l v e s a l i t t l e e f f o r t of w i l l t o give up the a u t h o r i t y of the t e x t , because i t seems, i l l u s o r i l y , t o o f f e r s e c u r i t y . But i f t h a t hurdle can be jumped, the l i f e of the inner images w i l l be found rewarding, a stimulus towards f u r t h e r c r e a t i v i t y , and an a i d t o r e l a x a t i o n . There can be no dogmatic utterance as t o 126 how t h i s i s done, because i t i s a h i g h l y I d i o s y n c r a t i c a c t i v i t y , and each has t o f i n d h i s or her own way. The r e f u s a l t o play an unpleasant r o l e , the subservience t o the a u t h o r i t y of the t e x t , and/or d i r e c t o r , and a l a c k of c o n v i c t i o n about the part one i s p l a y i n g or the dramatic s i t u a t i o n , were the three main stumbling blocks encountered on the way. These a t t i t u d e s hindered the production of f r e e and spontaneous speech, as w e l l as f r e e and spontaneous movement. Where the inner c r i t i c or observer was a c t i v e the student actor was un-e a s i l y aware t h a t something was wrong, as t h e i r remarks about t h e i r dramatic r o l e s make c l e a r . Looking back, i t was s i g n i f i c a n t that Jeanine and Jan never played unpleasant parts when i m p r o v i s i n g , and that Jan's i m p r o v i -s a t i o n s were nota b l y f r e e r than her work w i t h a t e x t . Her voice came up and her movements were u s u a l l y r e l a x e d . Dan, too, gave the impression that i m p r o v i s i n g was a t o t a l l y d i f f e r e n t t h i n g f o r him than working w i t h a t e x t . Both a l s o had problems w i t h t e x t -in-the-head, perhaps more so than the others. A l l the three areas were, of course, r e l a t e d , though some i n d i v i d u a l s were a f f l i c t e d more by one than the other s . Everyone had t o t a c k l e t h e i r l a c k of c o n v i c t i o n , one way or the other. Other f a c t o r s may account f o r t h i s l a c k , besides not knowing how t o work on i t , though t h i s seemed t o be the major one. One of them was discussed e a r l i e r i n connection w i t h the q u a l i t y of the t e x t i t s e l f . A play could be w r i t t e n i n an i n -authentic way, or have u n i t s w i t h i n i t that d i d not r i n g t r u e ; where t h i s happened the ac t o r ' s d i s b e l i e f i n h i s part and s i t u a -t i o n was heightened, and h i s task i n general made much harder. 127 He sounded i n a u t h e n t i c , as w e l l as the t e x t . The r e f u s a l t o be nasty we have already looked a t . This was a l s o a r e f u s a l t o be l i e v e t h a t i f the actor was In t h i s s i t u a -t i o n he would do so and so. He cannot accept that the character or s i t u a t i o n i s as unpleasant as the playwright or d i r e c t o r says i t i s , and says t o h i m s e l f , " I f v e never met anyone l i k e t h a t . " , or "Iago could not e x i s t outside the play of O t h e l l o . " . and so on. F e e l i n g and Spontaneity What i s f e e l i n g on stage? I n the o l d debate on the s u b j e c t , begun i n the eighteenth century, f e e l i n g and coldness were con-18 t r a s t e d . Diderot i n h i s Paradox sets up an actor of s e n s i b i l i t y as a targ e t f o r h i s arrows of d e r i s i o n . He comes down h e a v i l y on the side of detachment or coldness. The great actor i s one who c o o l l y c a l c u l a t e s and demonstrates the f e e l i n g s appropriate t o the r o l e . I n no way does he share them. Diderot even points out t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e f o r an acto r and a c t r e s s , on bad terms w i t h each other, t o enact a love scene w h i l e q u a r r e l l i n g under t h e i r breath. (One cannot help.wondering how much, i f at a l l , the audience responded t o the love scene.) I n contrast t o t h i s c o l d person, he represents the actor of s e n s i b i l i t y as one who i s e a s i l y upset and moved t o f a c i l e t e a r s , and who so exhausts himself e m o t i o n a l l y on stage that he barely has the stamina t o c a r r y the performance through. The weakness i n the argument i n favour of the c o l d , unemotional.actor i s revealed.at t h i s p o i n t , f o r the actor who f e e l s i s depicted as Denis de D i d e r o t , The Paradox of A c t i n g , t r a n s , by W. H. P o l l o c k , New York, H i l l and Wang. 1957. : 128 capable of f a c i l e and sentimental emotion only. S e n t i m e n t a l i t y has been w e l l - d e f i n e d as inadequate emotion. I t i s t r u e that some actors have the g i f t of t e a r s , and that the use of t h i s g i f t may be appropriate t o c e r t a i n r o l e s . But i f t h i s i s the only kind of f e e l i n g that i s meant, then the subject i s not worth the debate. 19 I n C h a r l o t t e Bronte's V l l l e t t e there i s a chapter c a l l e d "The V a s h t i " , s a i d t o be a d e s c r i p t i o n of the great French a c t r e s s , Rachel, p l a y i n g Phedre. The account i t s e l f i s a h i g h l y dramatic p i e c e , and the w r i t e r was e v i d e n t l y i n s p i r e d by the performance. The f e e l i n g described i s t h a t of b r i l l i a n t l y c o n t r o l l e d f u r y — f u r y and g r i e f . This kind of emotion i s f a r from the s e n s i b i l i t y of D i d e r o t ' s ' f e e l i n g 1 a c t o r . I n f a c t , a c t i n g of t h i s c a l i b r e transcends h i s debate. The two parts of the a c t o r described by Coquelin, the t o t a l emotional experience of the performer on the one hand plus the d i s p a s s i o n a t e observer on the other, are working together t o create a great i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of a demanding r o l e . And what about other kinds of f e e l i n g or passions, f o r instance t h a t of Harpagon i n The Miser f o r h i s t r e a s u r e , ;or MacBeth's horror at h i s own g u i l t ? These cannot be experienced at a f a c i l e l e v e l . F e e l i n g and character here are r e a l l y one t h i n g — the strong passion, whatever i t i s , c r e a t -ing a c e r t a i n kind of ego w i t h a c e r t a i n f l a v o u r , which the a c t o r has t o convey. Where s u c c e s s f u l , the question of spontaneity does not a r i s e . The f e e l i n g , s u c c e s s f u l l y conveyed always c a r r i e s • ^ C h a r l o t t e Bronte, V i l l e t t e , Panther Books L t d . , London, 1970. \29 w i t h i t the e f f e c t of o r i g i n a l i t y and freshness. I n the p r o j e c t , where such f e e l i n g was blocked, f o r whatever reason, t h i s e f f e c t was l a c k i n g , and replaced e i t h e r by a 'reading* q u a l i t y or by an exaggerated s t r a i n i n g f o r e f f e c t . I t i s however tru e t o say, th a t f e e l i n g on stage i s not the same as i t i s i n r e a l l i f e . I n l i f e , emotion may be more profound, much more p a i n f u l and oft e n u n p r e d i c t a b l e . On stage i t has to be p r e d i c t a b l e , though i t may vary from performance t o performance i n depth and i n t e n s i t y . And on stage the appropriate emotion has to be d i r e c t e d i n an orchestrated way i n r e l a t i o n t o others and by a v i g i l a n t and observant i n t e l l i g e n c e . One l a s t comment about student a c t o r s . I t o f t e n happens th a t work i n a theatre department i s undertaken by people t a k i n g courses i n other d i s c i p l i n e s . I n many ways t h i s makes the work more i n t e r e s t i n g both t o the students and those working w i t h them. But i t means that many student actors have had much t r a i n i n g i n u s i n g t h e i r b r a i n s , and very l i t t l e i n using i n t u i t i o n , emotion and v o i c e . They are, according t o McLuhan, p r i n t - o r i e n t e d , and f i n d the challenge t o express something o r a l l y s u r p r i s i n g and new. A student may t y p i c a l l y r e act by wanting t o 'understand' what i s wanted, r a t h e r than t a k i n g the plunge and doing i t . They want to t h i n k about i t or t a l k about i t , but not f e e l i t or express i t . Most of us do know what i s re q u i r e d i n a given dramatic s i t u a t i o n , but are a f r a i d t o move i n t o a c t i o n . F e e l i n g s are i n s t a n t l y t r a n s l a t e d i n t o thought as a defence. As the great Zen Master, Huang Po, s a i d i n another connection: 130 To make use of your minds t o t h i n k c o n c e p t u a l l y , i s t o leave the substance and a t t a c h yourselves t o f o r m . 2 0 This mental a c t i v i t y i s f a t a l t o actors as v e i l as d i s c i p l e s seeking enlightenment. The mind at a very deep l e v e l knows a l l the human emotions, negative or p o s i t i v e . I t was t o the task of reaching t h a t l e v e l t h a t Stanislavskj, / ;and a l l f i r s t - r a t e a c tors addressed themselves. -John B l o f i e l d , rendered i n t o E n g l i s h by The Zen Teaching of  Huang Po. New York, Grove Press I n c . , 1958. 130a B i b l i o g r a p h y B e n e d i t t i s Robert, The Aetor At Work. New J e r s e y , p r e n t i c e H a l l I n c . , 1970. Bentley, E r i c , The Theory of the Modern Stage. Hamondsworth, Middlesex, England, Penguin Books, 1968. Coquelin, Constant, The Art of the A c t o r . London, A l l e n and Unwin, 1932. D i d e r o t , Denis de, The Paradox of A c t i n g , t r a n s l a t e d by W. H. f o l l o e k , New York, H i l l and Wang, 1957. Goffman, E r v i n e , The P r e s e n t a t i o n of S e l f i n Everyday L i f e . Garden C i t y , New York, Doubleday Anchor Books, 1959. Grotowski, J e r z y , Towards A Poor Theatre. New York, Simon and Shuster, 1969. Magarshaek, David, t r a n s l a t e d and w i t h In t r o d u c t o r y Essay by S t a n i s l a v s k i on The Art of the Stage. London, Faber and Faber, 1950l • Moore, Sonia, The S t a n i s l a v s k i System. New York, The V i k i n g P r e s s , 1969. S p o l i n , V i o l a , Improvisations f o r the Theatre. Evanston. 111., Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1970. S t a n i s l a v s k i , C o n s t a n t i n , An Actor Prepares, t r a n s l a t e d by E l i z a b e t h Reynolds Hapgood, New York, Theatre A r t s Books, 1970. S t a n i s l a v s k i , C o n s t a n t i n , B u i l d i n g a Character, t r a n s l a t e d by E l i z a b e t h Reynolds Hapgood, New York, Theatre A r t s Books, 1969. S t a n i s l a v s k i , C o n s t a n t i n , My L i f e i n A r t , t r a n s l a t e d by J . J . Robbins, Cleveland and New York, Meridian Books, The World P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1956. 131 APPENDIX A Interviews With F i v e Members of the Cast of The Sport of My Mad Mother  Interv i e w I In t e r v i e w e r : The f i r s t t h i n g I want t o ask you i s , you know you read the play before you were c a s t , d i d you want t o be cast f o r Fak or would you have p r e f e r r e d t o play another part? Rob: No, I didn't want t o play Fak at f i r s t . I wanted t o play Steve because of the way he t a l k s t o the audience. I thought I probably would be cast f o r Fak, but I wanted t o have a d i f f e r e n t s o r t of a part at f i r s t , but once I got i n t o i t I was r e a l l y happy. I n t . : What was the a t t r a c t i o n of Steve? Rob: I t was j u s t the idea that i f I had played i t , I wanted t o play i t so tha t the audience would not know f o r c e r t a i n whether I was a c t i n g or whether I was j u s t t a l k i n g t o them. The whole idea of j u s t t a l k i n g t o them f a s c i n a t e d me. And I have played the drums, so the idea of the drums a t t r a c t e d me. I n t . : Have you done a part l i k e Steve before or would i t have been something new? Rob: No, I j u s t remember when I auditioned f o r t h i s group I read the Stage Manager, and I l i k e d doing i t so much that since then I have been a t t r a c t e d t o that s o r t of i d e a . I n t . : You mean i n Our Town? Rob: Yes, I do. I n t . : I see. When i t came t o i t , d i d you l i k e p l a y i n g Fak? 132 Rob: Oh yes, I loved i t once I r e a l l y got i n t o i t . I n t . : Did you f i n d i t an e f f o r t t o get that kind of ch a r a c t e r , or d i d i t come n a t u r a l l y ? Rob: Some of i t came n a t u r a l l y but i t r e q u i r e d q u i t e a b i t of an e f f o r t t o f i g u r e out the d e t a i l s and get the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n c o n s i s t e n t i n my own mind. I n t . : D i d y o u l i k e the play? Rob: The play as a whole or . . . I n t . : Yes, apart from what you d i d i n i t . Rob: Yes, because I- have always been a t t r a c t e d t o anything t h a t plays w i t h the t e x t u r e of words. I l i k e d i t i n that sense, but I d i s l i k e d the t h i r d act somewhat. I l i k e d doing j u s t the f i r s t act on i t s own, except my f a v o r i t e act i n the whole play was the second a c t , because there was so much of a p l a y i n g w i t h the words. I n t . : Yes. You played i n i t before didn't you, or read i t before i n a group? Rob: Not r e a l l y - we d i d mostly the second act and i t was more of a game. We hadn't r e a l l y got i n t o the characters at a l l , and that was three years ago. I had f o r g o t t e n most of i t anyway, except f o r the o c c a s i o n a l l i n e . Int..: I see. How d i d you l e a r n your l i n e s ? Rob: A c t u a l memorization of them was qu i t e easy. At f i r s t I thought i t would be very d i f f i c u l t because when I sat down at home and looked at them and t r i e d t o do i t , i t seemed almost i m p o s s i b l e . But I found that j u s t from r e h e a r s a l s , and e s p e c i a l l y the l i n e r e h e a r s a l s I was able t o p i c k them up q u i t e q u i c k l y and i t was only a matter of i n c r e a s i n g the speed. The big sec t i o n s l i k e my speech and my poem I memorized at home. I n t . : I see. Did you f i n d the l i n e r e h e a r s a l s valuable? 133 Rob; Oh yes, very. I n t . : Just f o r l i n e s or f o r anything e l s e ? Rob; W e l l , l i n e s and general rhythm and g e t t i n g an idea of the •whole movement of the pl a y . I n t . : The shape of a l l the d i f f e r e n t u n i t s began t o run together? Rob; Yes. > I n t . : What kind of pre - r e h e a r s a l e x e r c i s e s d i d you prefer? You have done a l o t of pr e - r e h e a r s a l e x e r c i s e s i n your drama courses, I imagine. Which kind d i d you l i k e best? £o_b_: Of a l l I've ever done? I n t . : Yes. Rob: W e l l , I r e a l l y l i k e d that c i r c l e ( i . e . the Sound and Movement) once we got i n t o i t . I t ' s hard t o say. What we used t o always do i n the th e a t r e courses was warm-ups t o music which I always enjoyed when I was younger because they had f a n t a s t i c records l i k e "Let there be drums", and th i n g s l i k e that which were very, very rhythmic and which you could do a l o t t o . But as we got ol d e r and more mature, f o r some reason we got very sombre music. I used t o go t o the c l a s s e s f e e l i n g very happy and eve r y t h i n g , and would get depressed by the end, so I didn't l i k e those. But I l i k e d working w i t h music and records and doing j u s t general e x e r c i s e s s t a r t i n g out w i t h breathing, being a rag d o l l - th a t s o r t of t h i n g - and gr a d u a l l y working ourselves up. 1 I n t . : Do you f i n d that doing t h i s kind of exe r c i s e before you approach a t e x t r e a l l y warms you up towards I t so tha t when you come t o the s c r i p t you don't f e e l any sense of a l i e n a t i o n from i t ? Rob: You mean a r e h e a r s a l r i g h t i n the middle a f t e r we had already read the t h i n g before? A 13M-I n t . : No, I mean i f you came t o r e h e a r s a l and simply went s t r a i g h t i n t o the play and didn't do any e x e r c i s e s - would i t be d i f f e r e n t from the experience of rehearsing w i t h warm-up ex e r c i s e s ? Would i t change your a t t i t u d e t o the t e x t ? Rob: Oh, I don't know about a t t i t u d e t o the t e x t - t h a t ' s hard t o say. I t ' s a d i f f e r e n t l e v e l . I'm j u s t i n a more p h y s i c a l and v o c a l space than i f I've only read the t e x t . You're more i n a mental reading space and you can enjoy i t and have the same a t t i t u d e i n a sense, t o the play but your body i s n ' t responding t o i t - j u s t your mind. I n t . : How d i d you f i n d the part of Fak p h y s i c a l l y - d i d you f e e l f o r example p h y s i c a l l y easy? Rob: W e l l , i t was a tremendous d r a i n on me, e s p e c i a l l y on my emotions mainly because of the h y s t e r i c a l b i t at the end; i t made doing a run-through of i t twice i n the evening very d i f f i c u l t , and I had t o psyche myself up t o do i t the second time. That would leave me drained at the.end, but that was more of a mental t h i n g I guess. A c t u a l l y , p h y s i c a l l y I guess i t was f i n e . I n t . : D i d you f e e l at ease on the stage - not awkward or aware of hands or anything l i k e t h a t ? Rob: I f e l t at ease, yes. Int..: Did you have any s p e c i f i c v ocal problems w i t h i t ? Rob: W e l l , I wasn't sure at the time what I was doing wrong, because I found a f t e r two r e h e a r s a l s of i t , one run-through i n an evening would be f i n e , but a f t e r two run-throughs my voice would o f t e n be hoarse or at l e a s t f e e l very s t r a i n e d , and I didn't know what I was doing wrong. Since doing the p l a y , I have found what my t r o u b l e I s . I seem t o s t a r t the words up i n my throat where • 135 I shouldn't, and I get the volume by then pushing w i t h my diaphragm so tha t I'm doing both the breathing i n my chest and the diaphragm; i t ' s j u s t s t a r t i n g w i t h the chest and g e t t i n g there - the push of the diaphragm, and th e r e f o r e I'm g e t t i n g both the volume and the s t r a i n , so I have t o work on t h a t . I n t . : Do you c o n s c i o u s l y use breathing techniques? Rob: Not when I'm on stage. The only time I had t o s t a r t t h i n k -i n g about my breathing, i t j u s t seemed t o come a u t o m a t i c a l l y and I didn't t h i n k about i t , except i n the part of the poem, when the f i r s t few times I d i d i t I found I was breathing wrong, because sometimes I'd be pushing the words out and have h a r d l y enough a i r t o do i t , and I j u s t had t o reorganize my breathing i n t h a t b i t , but other than that I d i d no conscious work. I n t . : You know we d i d a l o t of imp r o v i s a t i o n s e a r l i e r i n the year. When you came t o having a t e x t , d i d you f i n d i t impeded the expression of character or f e e l i n g ? Rob: No, I p r e f e r r e d i t r e a l l y because a l l through the improvis a -t i o n s I f e l t t hat I had never r e a l l y got i n t o i t . I t wasn't the f a u l t of t h i s set-up or anything but i t was f o r some reason my own s t a t e of mind - I wasn't r e a l l y g e t t i n g i n t o the t h i n g . But once I had a s c r i p t where there was some r e a l l y d e f i n i t e , t a n g i b l e t h i n g t o work w i t h , I enjoyed i t more. I n t . : So, i t was doing an i m p r o v i s a t i o n f o r you, that was more of an impediment t o expressing character than when you have a t e x t ? Rob: I n a way I suppose. I t wasn't r e a l l y an impediment. I n t . : You remember you d i d an i m p r o v i s a t i o n w i t h Dan. You were i n competition t o s e l l a car t o Jan? 136 Rob: Oh yes. i n t . . : The words came very e a s i l y -• that sounded q u i t e easy. Rob: Yeah. They a l l came f a i r l y easy. That's why I wanted t o keep away from the word 'impediment' -- n e i t h e r seemed an impediment. I n working on the s c r i p t s I worked more on the c h a r a c t e r , so that my mental s t a t e was r i g h t . But i n the im-* p r o v i s a t i o n s I hadn't concentrated enough i n a l o t of them and so f e l t I was sort of doing a h a l f ~ a s s e d job i n the characters I was doing and o f t e n wouldn't r e a l l y do anything much w i t h them. I n t . : Okay, thanks very much. Inte r v i e w I I I n t . : You know you read the play f i r s t before you knew what part you were going t o p l a y . Did you want to be cast f o r Cone or would you have p r e f e r r e d t o play someone else? D a n i e l : I r e a l l y wanted the part of Steve at f i r s t . I n t . : Oh, why d i d you want t o play Steve? D a n i e l : I t h i n k I saw the character d i f f e r e n t l y than i t was portrayed. I j u s t wanted to play that kind of a part as a more r e a l l y menacing p a r t . I n t . : So Steve i s menacing? D a n i e l : Yeah, very menacing. I n t . : Can you remember why? p a n i e l : The rhythms and the l i n e s and l i k e " r eleases f r u s t r a t i o n s , " l i k e before he s a i d that l i n e "see" l i k e a drum r o l l or a machine gun f i r e . I n t . : So you would have played i t q u i t e d i f f e r e n t l y from Dan? 137 D a n i e l : Yeah. I n t . : Do you t h i n k anything e l s e i n the part suggested that kind of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ? D a n i e l : I can't remember too much of i t now, but he seemed very contemptuous of the audience, and the way the drums have such a very p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e t o them. I n t . : When you were cast f o r Cone, d i d you regr e t i t very much? D a n i e l : At f i r s t u n t i l I began t o f e e l my way round the part a b i t more. I had a l o t of t r o u b l e at f i r s t . I n t . : How long d i d i t take you, roughly? D a n i e l : About half-way through the production. I n t . : About two-and-a-half weeks or so? D a n i e l : Yeah. I n t . : D id you l i k e the play when you read i t ? D a n i e l : I l i k e d i t but I didn't t h i n k of i t as a great p l a y . I n t . : No. As we progressed w i t h ' i t , d i d you s t i l l l i k e i t ? D a n i e l : I began t o l i k e i t a b i t more. I n t . : So your i n i t i a l r e a c t i o n was not that e n t h u s i a s t i c ? D a n i e l : No. I t was only a f t e r we were able t o do some of the movements e s p e c i a l l y , they seemed t o come t o l i f e . I n t . : D i d you f i n d the t e x t obscure or d i f f i c u l t t o understand? D a n i e l : No, not t o any great degree. I n t . : You didn't f i n d the E n g l i s h hard t o understand? D a n i e l : No. I n t . : How d i d you l e a r n your l i n e s ? D a n i e l : Not i n t e l l e c t u a l l y at a l l r e a l l y . I j u s t looked over i t a l o t . I n t . : Did you l e a r n by r o t e at a l l ? 138 D a n i e l : By what? I n t . : By r o t e - r e p e a t i n g them over and oyer to y o u r s e l f ? D a n i e l : No. I n t . : So i t was through the r e h e a r s a l s . D a n i e l : P r e t t y w e l l t o t a l l y . I n t . : Did you f i n d the l i n e r e h e a r s a l s valuable? D a n i e l : I thought they were one of the biggest h e l p s . I n t . : Just w i t h l i n e s ? D a n i e l : Just w i t h the l i n e s . I n t . : Did you f i n d them valuable i n any other way? D a n i e l : Yeah. I l i k e d t o say the l i n e s without any emotion, without anything expected of me, j u s t so i t would become f i x e d i n my head. And when I was doing that I wouldn't have t o worry about expressing the emotion of the l i n e , and I could t h i n k about the l i n e and the p o s s i b i l i t i e s a v a i l a b l e t o me i n t h i s i n t e r p r e -t a t i o n . I n t . : I see. And when you had t o rehearse on your f e e t so t o speak, d i d you f i n d t h i s more d i f f i c u l t ? D a n i e l : I n i t i a l l y . I n t . : At what point d i d the l i n e s stop bothering you? D a n i e l : A f t e r about two or three weeks. The more I could do the p h y s i c a l gestures, the more the l i n e s seemed, to f i t . The m o t i v a t i o n would come more from my movements than anything e l s e . I n t . : Yes. I remember a f t e r about two or three weeks you d i d an i m p r o v i s a t i o n w i t h Rob, i n which you were competitive w i t h him. You were both s e l l i n g a car t o Jan. I t seemed at the time that t h i s gave you some kind of break-through i n the p a r t . I s that r i g h t or i s that impression c o r r e c t ? 139 D a n i e l : Yes, because up t o that point I was very unsure of my a b i l i t y . And that i m p r o v i s a t i o n gave me a chance t o j u s t l e t l o o s e , and i t served t o c l e a r the a i r a b i t . I n t . : D i d the e f f e c t stay w i t h you? D a n i e l : I'd l o s e i t every once i n a w h i l e , but the general e f f e c t was there f o r the r e s t of the p r o d u c t i o n . I n t . : What was i t about the i m p r o v i s a t i o n t h a t helped you. Can you say at a l l ? D a n i e l : I t was the wildness of i t a l l . I didn't r e a l l y t h i n k about what I was doing. I j u s t s o r t of y e l l e d - I was emotionally s e l l i n g the c a r . I n t . : Yes, but you were i n competition w i t h Rob. Did you s t i l l f e e l he was going t o win? D a n i e l : No. I n t . : And d i d th a t make a d i f f e r e n c e ? D a n i e l : I; t h i n k so. For the part of Cone I f e l t the s u p e r i o r i t y . I n t . : So the i m p r o v i s a t i o n helped you towards f e e l i n g s u p e r i o r t o Rob which you needed t o do, i s th a t r i g h t ? D a n i e l : Yeah. I n t . : Of the p r e - r e h e a r s a l e x e r c i s e s we d i d , we d i d some t r u s t e x e r c i s e s e a r l i e r on, and we d i d a l o t of i m p r o v i s a t i o n s and we d i d the c i r c l e , i . e . the Sound and Movement. Which of these e x e r c i s e s or any others that you've done anywhere e l s e do you p r e f e r before a r e h e a r s a l ? D a n i e l : I r e a l l y l i k e the t r u s t e x e r c i s e s most of a l l , because I always f e l t l i k e I could operate f a r be t t e r when I f e l t more a member of the group i n s t e a d of an i n d i v i d u a l and the t r u s t e x e r c i s e s gave me a group i d e n t i t y , w h i l e sometimes I f e l t w i t h llfO the Sound and Movement e x e r c i s e s , i t was more of a competition. I n t . : I see. The t r u s t e x e r c i s e s p a r t i c u l a r l y the kind where you f a l l backwards and people catch you? D a n i e l : Yeah. I n t . : And d i d you f e e l any kind of p r e - r e h e a r s a l e x e r c i s e i s b e t t e r than not having them? D a n i e l : Yeah. I n t . : How d i d you f i n d the part p h y s i c a l l y . Did you f e e l p h y s i c a l l y comfortable? D a n i e l : Yeah, I d i d . I n t . : When we went over and over something, l i k e we d r i l l e d and d r i l l e d and d r i l l e d some of the t h i n g s that were hard to do t e c h n i c a l l y l i k e t a p i n g up Dean, th a t kind of t h i n g , d i d you f i n d the r e p e t i t i o n u s e f u l or d i d you f i n d i t simply exhausting and that i t got s t a l e ? D a n i e l : At the time of doing i t , i t seemed t o get s t a l e , but the r e s u l t s that came out l a t e r I thought were r e a l l y b e n e f i c i a l . I n t . : How d i d you f i n d the part v o c a l l y ; were you aware of any s p e c i f i c v o c a l problems? D a n i e l : I hadn't r e a l l y thought about that much. I n t . : W e l l , from crude things l i k e a u d i b i l i t y t o anything e l s e . D a n i e l : I f e l t my speech patterns were i n a way too f a s t f o r the p a r t . I n o t i c e d t h a t I would s t a r t speaking too f a s t and I couldn't see Cone doing t h a t , l i k e I could see him being snappy but not r e a l l y r a p i d l y snappy. That's the t h i n g that bothered me the most. I n t . : I see. Did you f e e l any d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h the loud voice of Rob? Ikl D a n i e l : I u s u a l l y -wasn't that aware of there being an audience, so that I was only p l a y i n g against Rob and not pl a y i n g f o r the audience so I didn't r e a l l y pay a t t e n t i o n t o h i s v o i c e . I'd only become aware of i t when you'd t e l l me tha t I was i n a u d i b l e . I n t . : When you have a t e x t instead of having j u s t a f r e e i m p r o v i s a t i o n , do you f i n d the t e x t i t s e l f impedes the expression of character or f e e l i n g - j u s t having a s c r i p t ? D a n i e l : Yes, having a s c r i p t . I n t . : Which do you p r e f e r doing? D a n i e l : I m p r o v i s a t i o n s . I n t . : Does t h i s hold t r u e even when you know the t e x t very w e l l and .have thrown i t away so t o speak? D a n i e l : There's a sense of s e c u r i t y w i t h the t e x t but at the same time when I improvise I f e e l I am communicating f a r more and being f a r more c r e a t i v e . I n t . : Has t h i s been so i n the past when you've done drama at school at a l l ? D a n i e l : Yeah. I n t . : When you improvise, can you e a s i l y improvise not merely f e e l i n g , but a character f o r a s i t u a t i o n ? D a n i e l : U s u a l l y f o r me that depends on the l e n g t h of time that we go on, or going back over the same imp r o v i s a t i o n s again and again i n d i f f e r e n t v a r i a t i o n s , I begin t o f e e l the character coming. I n t . : Yes, because we didn't do an i m p r o v i s a t i o n more than twice at most, I t h i n k , d i d we? D a n i e l : No. I n t . : I s there anything e l s e that you can t e l l me about your JA2 f e e l i n g s about having a t e x t or having language which i s n ' t the kin d you use every day and the demand made on you, so t o speak, t o be somebody el s e ? D a n i e l : I n t h i s p l a y , a l o t of the expressions used I didn't understand, yet I could see what they meant merely by the r e l a t i o n , so I could say them without a c t u a l l y knowing what they meant, but knowing i n a way how they should be s a i d . I suppose I was r a t h e r b l u f f i n g my way through i n c e r t a i n t h i n g s l i k e t h a t . I n t . : Was t h i s so even a f t e r we had rehearsed - I mean, you didn't ask f o r meaning? D a n i e l : Yeah, I didn't r e a l l y t h i n k i t was that necessary. I t was j u s t the i n t e n s i t y of the way i t was s a i d and how f a s t i t was s a i d . I n t . : You can't give any examples of t h a t ? D a n i e l : I can't remember any at the moment, no. I n t . : Okay. W e l l , thank you very much. Int e r v i e w I I I I n t . : W e l l , you had the play t o read before I cast the p a r t s , so you had some idea of i t . Did you want t o be cast f o r the part of Dean, or would you have p r e f e r r e d someone e l s e ? Mike: I j u s t s o r t of f i g u r e d I was e i t h e r going t o be Dean, Steve I l i k e d the idea of the parts l i k e Cone and Fak; they seemed t o be a l i t t l e more s o l i d , I don't know, more emotional. I l i k e d those parts but I didn't t h i n k that was r e a l l y what I was going t o be; th a t ' s j u s t the way I saw i t . 1^3 I n t . : Which were you a t t r a c t e d to? Mike: I t h i n k i t was Fak, he was so — oh wow I I t h i n k i t was Fak. I n t . : But you f i g u r e d t h a t you'd probably be cast f o r Dean or Steve? And of those two? Mike: Dean. I n t . : You l i k e d Dean. Some people would have l i k e d t o play Steve, i n f a c t both guys p l a y i n g Cone and Fak wanted to play Steve. Mike: That's strange; No, I d i d n ' t . I n t . : Did you l i k e the play? Mike: Yeah, I d i d . Yes, I l i k e d the energy of i t - you know i t ' s so optimum and so dry a l l the time, r a t h e r than j u s t a slow going down. I t ' s an e x c i t i n g p l a y . I n t . : You mean the way each s e c t i o n has a kind of c r i s i s ? Did you f i n d i t a bore - there were c e r t a i n s e c t i o n s which had t o be d r i l l e d over and over again because they were t e c h n i c a l l y d i f -f i c u l t t o do t o get words w i t h movements and sounds, l i k e the one where they f i r s t s t a r t t e a s i n g you, "Go round, he's l o o s e , he's looney" - that s e c t i o n , and the other s e c t i o n where they t i e you up i n newspaper and scotch tape, d i d you f i n d i t h e l p f u l t o do i t so many times or not? Mike: Oh yeah, I d i d . I don't ever remember being bored w i t h i t . I t ' s more l i k e every time you do i t you r e a l l y have t o do i t ; i t ' s not l i k e s i t t i n g back on i t . I n t . : I kind of wondered sometimes how people f e l t when we had done i t about twenty times at l e a s t and then we d i d i t again. Mike: Yeah. The only times I got bored during re h e a r s a l s was when I was watching somebody el s e doing something over and over and lMf over again. I n t . : Mike, how do you l e a r n your l i n e s - do you p i c k them up at r e h e a r s a l s or do you l e a r n them at home or what? Mike: I l e a r n them at home. I found the meaning of the l i n e s and the expression, I got those at r e h e a r s a l s ; and I found I had t r o u b l e doing that at home. I used tape recordings at home and played i t back and played i t back but I don't t h i n k i t helped very much except f o r j u s t l e a r n i n g l i n e s . I n t . : Why was t h i s , do you know? Could you analyze i t at a l l ? Why didn't i t help you t o do i t at home? Mike: I j u s t don't t h i n k I had the part very c l e a r i n my head, l i k e as r e h e a r s a l s went on i t got c l e a r e r and c l e a r e r t o me who Dean was, and how t o do them, and at the beginning i t wasn't c l e a r t o me how i t should be coming out. So when I heard the tape back, i t was l i k e , w e l l the l i n e s are r i g h t and i t doesn't sound too bad, but i t didn't seem t o f i t i n t o anything, or was that c h a r a c t e r . I n t . : D i d i t have anything t o do w i t h doing the part i n i s o l a t i o n ? Mike: Not so much, because when I p r a c t i c e d at home l a t e r , once i t became a l i t t l e c l e a r e r ; I didn't use a tape recorder because I could almost t e l l when I was doing i t r i g h t and could do i t at home a l l r i g h t . I t h i n k i t was j u s t a matter of g e t t i n g i t c l e a r i n my head and g e t t i n g the f e e l of i t . I n t . : R i g h t . Which kind of p r e - r e h e a r s a l e x e r c i s e s d i d you l i k e ? Do you r e c a l l we d i d some im p r o v i s a t i o n s ? We d i d some t r u s t e x e r c i s e s very e a r l y on and we d i d the c i r c l e most f r e q u e n t l y here. Mike: I l i k e d the c i r c l e f o r g e t t i n g the energy up and g e t t i n g moving. I l i k e d those t r u s t e x e r c i s e s , the ones where we d i d ii+5 almost two people going back and f o r t h across the l i n e , and the ones where you are just zapping with somebody else and very c l o s e l y following them. Int.: Copying everything they do. Mike: Yes. Int.: Those are not the trust exercises I meant. Those are the ones where you collapse and people have to catch you, or you run bl i n d f o l d and people prevent you. Mike: I missed out on that, I think; Int.: I see. Do you f i n d the improvisations helpful? Mike: I was just thinking of the l a s t one we d i d , that one about the store. I didn't f i n d that p a r t i c u l a r l y h e l p f u l - you know the one where we went into the store and i t was robbed. I didn't f i n d that h e l p f u l . Some of them are r e a l l y good f o r when you are getting into a part and doing i t and then reacting to others. I l i k e d doing that mining disaster one, you remember? Int.: Yes, that was a good one. Mike: And the Cinderella one, not Cinderella ... Int.: The melodrama? Mike: The melodrama, r i g h t . Int.: You were a heavy father? Yes, that was good. Mike: I t depends. They can be r e a l l y good. I think i t ' s just the matter of getting the part - you know, getting the character down. I think they're r e a l l y good then. I learned a l o t from those two p a r t i c u l a r ones - maybe i t was just because the charac-ters started coming out. Int.: And you found that l i n e s just came? Mike: Oh, yeah. I*f6 I n t . : How d i d you f i n d the part of Dean p h y s i c a l l y ? Did you f e e l p h y s i c a l l y comfortable on stage? Mike: Yeah, not too bad. I found one t h i n g : at f i r s t where I walked on and looked t o the r i g h t and turned o f f when I walked up on t h a t look-over t h i n g , that put me r i g h t t h e r e . That was the most important t h i n g f o r some reason. Just l o o k i n g out l i k e I was l o o k i n g round, put me r i g h t i n t o the s i t u a t i o n and made me f e e l - w e l l , I am Dean. We d i d n ' t get on t o that u n t i l very l a t e . I n t . : Yes, We had an exact place f o r you t o do t h a t ? Mike: No, before I had been coming on, and j u s t walking across and then n o t i c i n g the audience. But then we changed that and I walked on, stopped and looked, you know I was l o o k i n g upstage w i t h my back t o the audience and then I turned j u s t my head r i g h t and then turned l e f t and j u s t happened t o see the audience. I t was j u s t that l i t t l e pause i n time that seemed t o put me t h e r e . I n t . : I see. Then t h i s didn't happen almost u n t i l we got i n t o the studio? Mike: Yes, j u s t about. I don't know, but i t was j u s t from that movement - maybe i t was j u s t because everything e l s e was j e l l i n g -but I j u s t remember every time I d i d t h a t i t was g r e a t . I t seemed t o work from then on. I n t . : So t h a t a c t u a l l y helped you t o get the c h a r a c t e r . Mike: Yeah, and the s i t u a t i o n . I n t . : And how d i d you f i n d the part v o c a l l y ? D i d you have any v o c a l problems? Mike: Yeah, my v o i c e , you know - that y e l l i n g . I n t . : Shouting 'Stop'? Mike: Yeah. I guess I j u s t don't have my voice t r a i n e d enough Ih7 y e t , but when I had t o shout down those three people, you know three of them going around and we'd do i t over and over, my voice j u s t went time a f t e r time. I n t . : Yes, w e l l i t was heavy that way. But you didn't have any problem r e l a t i n g t o the audience i n the e a r l y part where you t a l k t o them d i r e c t ? Mike: That f i r s t piece? No, i t seemed a l o t bet t e r having them there f i n a l l y . I t was a l i t t l e d i s t r a c t i n g t o see some of them s i t t i n g there s m i l i n g at me. I n t . : People you knew? Mike: No, i t was j u s t strange t o see some guy s i t t i n g there s m i l i n g at me I didn't know, s i t t i n g there s m i l i n g l i k e he'd j u s t found an o l d f r i e n d or something. I n t . : Yes. I f e e l t h a t both Steve and Dean r e a l l y need an audience. Doing i t i n r e h e a r s a l must be qu i t e d i f f i c u l t . Mike: Yeah, I found I j u s t had t o imagine an audience. I had t o imagine c h a i r s out there and people a c t u a l l y s i t t i n g t h e r e . I t helped when I got i n t o the s t u d i o t o see the a c t u a l c h a i r audience t h e r e . I n t . : D id you f i n d having a t e x t impeded the expression of character? You know you s a i d that having done a l o t of improvisa t i o n s you could get the character i n the melodrama and so on. Did you f i n d having a c t u a l l i n e s impeded you i n g e t t i n g t o what Dean was l i k e ? Mike: Yeah, i t was l i k e I had t o search f o r him. They were the clues t o what h i s character was l i k e , and I had t o search through and t r y and f i n d out what i t was. The other ones you can drag from a couple of sources that you have on your own and put them l>+8 together and s o r t of chop o f f corners, but you couldn't do that w i t h Dean. I s t a r t e d out w i t h t h a t head space t h i n g and t r i e d t o get h i s background, but that didn't f i t i n w i t h the c l u e s . I t was d i f f e r e n t t o t a l l y , you know l i k e i t was a search u n t i l I found him. I n t . : Some actors do b u i l d up a whole biography and f i n d i t h e l p f u l ; w i t h others i t doesn't work. Mike: I t h i n k i t was h e l p f u l i n some ways to get the idea and t r y t o put a l i t t l e f l e s h on i t . I n t . : Did you f i n d i n r e h e a r s a l at a l l that you got i n t o a r u t w i t h the l i n e s , so you could hear your own v o i c e , and i t got i n t o c e r t a i n i n t o n a t i o n s which you couldn't get out of? Please don't t h i n k I'm saying i t sounded l i k e t h a t . I'm only asking questions because r e a c t i o n s t o the a c t u a l speech set on paper i s what I'm i n t e r e s t e d i n i n asking these questions. Mike: No, I t h i n k i t was more l i k e t h a t at the beginning, l i k e when I didn't r e a l l y know the character and was j u s t doing the l i n e s I d i d get i n t o a t h i n g . But as soon as the l i n e s s t a r t e d t a k i n g on a meaning i t wasn't so bad. I n t . : And d i d you f i n d i n an i m p r o v i s a t i o n , not having l i n e s impedes the expression of character - having t o look f o r them and make them up - was i t a s t r a i n ? Mike: I t was a s t r a i n i n a way, but i t was l i k e you knew every l i n e you made up had t o f i t i n w i t h the c h a r a c t e r , had t o be an expression of the c h a r a c t e r . No, I don't t h i n k i t impeded the c h a r a c t e r ; i t sort of helped. I n t . : Good. Have you anything you want to say about the t h i n g i n general that I haven't asked you,- or Anything you discovered about y o u r s e l f ? Mike: Not a heck of a l o t . I found toward the end of the re h e a r s a l s I'd get a l i t t l e pissed o f f at the other a c t o r s sometimes. Maybe i t was j u s t nerves b u i l d i n g up t o the t h i n g . I n t . : Yes, they kept t r e a d i n g on you, too, didn't they? Mike: Yeah, r i g h t . I n t . : You were i n an unfortunate p o s i t i o n from t h i s point of view. Mike: But I d i d so r t of begin t o f e e l a l i t t l e - I don't know . . i n t . : Yes, w e l l t h a t ' s j u s t n a t u r a l . Did you have any a c t i n g problems of any kind? Mike: No, i t was a l l j u s t l e a r n i n g f o r me. This being the f i r s t t h i n g I've ever r e a l l y been i n , i t was j u s t a l l l e a r n i n g . I don't r e a l l y have anything t o compare i t w i t h . I n t . : Okay, w e l l f i n e . Thank you very much. Inte r v i e w IV I n t . : You know when you read the play through before I cast i t , of course there were only two women's p a r t s , but was P a t t y the one you wanted t o p l a y , or would you have l i k e d the other one? -Jan: I had mixed f e e l i n g s . Dodo r e a l l y i n t e r e s t e d me because i t was j u s t d i f f e r e n t and f u n , but w i t h P a t t y I knew I would l e a r n a l o t more by doing that p a r t , and i n that way I was i n t e r e s t e d i n i t . But Dodo a t t r a c t e d me more. I n t . : Yes, because i t was a b i t out of the ordinary? Jan: Yeah. I n t . : D id you l i k e the play? 150 Jan: I n f i r s t reading i t do you mean, or l o o k i n g back or what? I n t . : W e l l , both - what was your a t t i t u d e t o i t - how d i d i t develop? Jan: I n reading i t f i r s t I wasn't very sure about i t . I t was powerful, but i n reading the whole p l a y , e s p e c i a l l y the end which I didn't r e a l l y l i k e - but l o o k i n g at the f i r s t act and reading i t s e v e r a l times, then I was q u i t e i n t e r e s t e d i n how we would go about the sort of r i t u a l . That r e a l l y i n t e r e s t e d me. Then when we got i n t o i t , t o o , t h a t side of i t i n t e r e s t e d me. I l i k e d the play ... there's s t i l l t h i n g s about i t I don't understand. I don't understand what she was t r y i n g t o do, and tha t way I'm not so sure about; but as a whole yes. I n t . : Do you f e e l emotionally you don't understand, or that i t ' s a d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e and hard t o grasp. Jan: W e l l , i t seemed t o me, and I more and more f e l t i t , that i t was d e a l i n g w i t h something underneath a r e a l s i t u a t i o n , and that underneathness - I wasn't sure whether i t was qu i t e r i g h t . You know she was d e a l i n g w i t h q u i t e a b i t of v i o l e n c e , w e l l i t was r e a l , the things she was doing were r e a l ; i t was s o r t of an un d e r l y i n g v i o l e n c e and e a s i l y g e t t i n g i n t o orgy s i t u a t i o n s . I was questioning whether t h i s could happen i f you take i t out of the s i t u a t i o n of a s t r e e t gang, and i f she was saying t h a t , I'm not sure whether a l l she was saying was r i g h t . I n t . : You mean p a r t i c u l a r l y the r e l a t i o n s h i p between Greta and Cone? Jan: No, I mean more what could suddenly very q u i c k l y happen between these p a r t i c u l a r t h r e e , and w i t h others. I n t . : You mean w i t h the sudden switches of mood, yes. 151 •Jan: I t ' s a dangerous sort of f e e l i n g t o be t h i n k i n g about, but I guess you don't r e a l l y -want t o admit t h a t . I n t . : Yes, that they could suddenly switch i n t o almost a murderous v i o l e n c e then switch put of i t again. Jan: Yes, and so e a s i l y manipulate i t w i t h j u s t one word. I n t . : Yes, but she says at the beginning something about how inadequate they are emotionally - that the emotion i n a way i s kin d of on top - more profound emotions are not things they know. Jan: She says t h a t , but at the same time I had the f e e l i n g she was r e a l l y t a l k i n g t o a l l of u s , and i f th a t ' s the case, then t h a t ' s where I s t a r t t o worry and question. I mean, assuming she was not j u s t t a k i n g a s t r e e t gang i n London, then you s t a r t t o wonder. I n t . : Yes, e s p e c i a l l y as she a l s o says that i t s t a r t e d w i t h watching a bunch of u n i v e r s i t y students f o o l i n g around. Jan: Yes, r i g h t - t h a t ' s more t h r e a t e n i n g . I n t . : How d i d you l e a r n your l i n e s ? Jan: A couple of d i f f e r e n t ways - the short and frequent l i n e s , e s p e c i a l l y at the beginning of the play I tended t o break up i n t o u n i t s and so r t of l e a r n orders i n which things come. Then when we began rehearsing i t , they began t o make sense as w e l l . But at f i r s t i t was q u i t e a memorizing t h i n g . The longer speeches I s t a r t e d more w i t h the sense of what i t was, but i t s h i f t e d . As you got i n t o r e h e a r s a l s , the longer ones, even though I'd s t a r t e d w i t h l e a r n i n g i t by the sense, i t became more of a memory process. I t h i n k p a r t l y the longer speeches were a l s o the ones I was having a l o t of d i f f i c u l t y w i t h , the emotional set-up part of i t , I t h i n k . I n t . : Yes, one of those speeches was very d i f f i c u l t , and I t h i n k 152 not a good piece of w r i t i n g , that was a r e a l problem, sort of ov e r - w r i t t e n and out of charac t e r . The one about Greta, planets and s t a r s . Jan: Yes, that i s the one I was t h i n k i n g o f . I n t . : Did you f i n d the l i n e r e h e a r s a l s h e l p f u l ? Jan: Very much, both i n warming up beforehand and then going i n t o r e h e a r s a l and i n l e a r n i n g them and g e t t i n g the speed up on the cues - that was r e a l l y h e l p f u l . But i n the part where I'm g e t t i n g angry, where there were a few more l i n e s r a t h e r than the one-line t h i n g s , i t didn't r e a l l y help the l e a r n i n g . I n t . : I see. What kind of pr e - r e h e a r s a l e x e r c i s e s d i d you p r e f e r , the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s or the th i n g s we d i d e a r l i e r i n the F a l l term? We d i d some t r u s t e x e r c i s e s and these s o r t s of f e e l i n g e x e r c i s e s hand t o hand. Then we evolved t h i s Sound and Movement c i r c l e . Jan: The t r u s t e x e r c i s e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y the i n d i v i d u a l hand-to-hand t h i n g f o r me I r e a l l y l i k e . My concen t r a t i o n s o r t of snaps up very q u i c k l y and I l i k e that f o r s t a r t i n g , and the imp r o v i s a t i o n s a l s o . A few times i n r e h e a r s a l s we'd stop and do an Impr o v i s a t i o n , sometimes r e l a t e d d i r e c t l y t o something but sometimes, w e l l once we d i d the store robbery and i t had some of the same elements as the play and I found that r e a l l y helped; I l i k e d the ones which were somewhat r e l a t e d t o what we were going t o be re h e a r s i n g . The Sound and Movement towards the end when we d i d i t jus t before a complete run-through, then i t was h e l p f u l because you were r e a l l y f e e l i n g as a group, and that group f e e l i n g f o r me was r e a l l y important, because you could go on then, and f e e l you were p u t t i n g something together; but i n terms of concentration and i n i n t e n s i t y , i t didn't help n e a r l y so much. 153 I n t . : One person s a i d that he found i t qu i t e t i r i n g ; he put so much e f f o r t i n t o doing the Sound and Movement that he was a c t u a l l y q u i t e t i r e d when he came t o the r e h e a r s a l . Did you f i n d that at a l l ? Jan: No, they f e l t q u i t e d i s t i n c t t o me. I n t . : I see. Did they help you t o f e e l a l e r t ? Jan: Yes, p a r t i c u l a r l y towards the end when we were moving q u i c k l y from one t o the other t o an extent, but I found some of the other t h i n g s more h e l p f u l i n that way. I n t . : You were saying about c o n c e n t r a t i o n , I seem to remember we di d one i m p r o v i s a t i o n where you were supposed t o be l o o k i n g at p i c t u r e s i n a g a l l e r y and imagining the p i c t u r e s very thoroughly, do you f i n d that kind of i m p r o v i s a t i o n h e l p f u l where there i s n ' t much outward a c t i o n but r a t h e r something going on i n your head? Jan: But I f i n d more h e l p f u l ones that i n v o l v e personal r e l a -t i o n s l i k e p a r t i c u l a r l y some of the quiet but intense t h i n g s l i k e the F.L.Q. type of i m p r o v i s a t i o n - I f i n d that much more h e l p f u l . I n t . : Yes, and the mine d i s a s t e r ? Jan: Yes, very much. That f o r me was the best i m p r o v i s a t i o n i n a l l s o r t s of ways. I n t . : How d i d you f i n d the part of P a t t y p h y s i c a l l y ? Jan: I was scared of i t f o r q u i t e a w h i l e . I n t . : D id you f e e l r e l a x e d on stage or p h y s i c a l l y t i r e d ? Jan: Again, the l a s t week or so I f e l t q u i t e good about i t . I was q u i t e r e l a x e d , but before that not q u i t e so much. I was probably o v e r l y s e l f - c o n s c i o u s about i t . I n t . : Before that you looked sometimes p h y s i c a l l y s l i g h t l y uncomfortable, t h i s i s why I asked you. 15>+ Jan; Yeah, r i g h t . I n t . : How d i d you f i n d i t v o c a l l y ? Did you f i n d you had any p a r t i c u l a r v o c a l problems? Jan: A couple, one was j u s t the volume l e v e l - I had t o t h i n k t o get i t loud enough, e s p e c i a l l y s t a r t i n g o f f . I t seems i f I r e a l l y concentrated on i t f o r the f i r s t scene then i t went a l l r i g h t . I n t . : When you say ' t h i n k ' , you mean you had t o remind y o u r s e l f ? Jan: Yes. I n t . : Yes, your voi c e i s n a t u r a l l y f a i r l y low. Jan: Yes, and I tend t o l e t I t go lower than i t n a t u r a l l y i s , and tend to mumble i n t o sentences. Otherwise, w e l l when we were i n t e r p r e t i n g the anger scene as s o r t of s t r a i g h t loud anger r a t h e r than sarcasm, or s o r t of a s a r c a s t i c anger - I was j u s t at a l o s s as to g e t t i n g v a r i a t i o n i n t o a l o u d , angry anger and that v o c a l l y , too. But when we moved i n t o a more s o r t of c y n i c a l t h i n g , I f e l t e a s i e r w i t h I t . I n t . : Yes, I see. D i d you f i n d the k i n d of emotion she expresses kind of uncomfortable t o express, or d i d you get easy w i t h i t -you know she was q u i t e unpleasant at times. Jan: I t got e a s i e r and I could understand i t more again when i t got i n t o the s a r c a s t i c , more c o n t r o l l e d kind of t h i n g but I found the l e s s c o n t r o l l e d anger very hard. I hadn't had any experience w i t h i t on e i t h e r end, e i t h e r being i t or having i t happen to me, or being i n a room w i t h i t and I found that very hard t o understand. I n t . : You s a i d s e v e r a l t h i n g s about the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s which you l i k e d . Did you f i n d having a t e x t impeded the expression of character? Jan: W e l l , I t h i n k there's a double answer f o r t h a t . I n one way, 155 w i t h the t e x t you're given much more of a character than you ever were i n an i m p r o v i s a t i o n . I n an improv. you're given s o r t of a c h a r a c t e r , but you s t i l l put much more of y o u r s e l f , outwardly y o u r s e l f , i n t o i t ; whereas w i t h a t e x t you had t o take what was the r e . You're s t i l l very much p u t t i n g y o u r s e l f i n t o i t but you're p u t t i n g y o u r s e l f i n t o another character r a t h e r than y o u r s e l f w i t h another character - i f that defines i t enough. I n t . : D i d you have any sense of r e s t r i c t i o n once you had l i n e s ? Jan: To the extent that I couldn't do w i t h the l i n e s some of the thi n g s I wanted t o do or I saw that should be done. Gradually that worked out: I could do more; that k i n d of r e s t r i c t i o n , yes. But i n terms of j u s t f e e l i n g , ' w e l l , I have t o say t h i s l i n e now, I can't say what I want' s o r t of t h i n g - no, not a f t e r the l i n e s were learned at a l l . I n t . : Did you f i n d the l i n e s got set at a l l , so that a f t e r about three weeks' r e h e a r s a l , i f you were re q u i r e d t o change anything you found i t hard - they seemed t o come i n a c e r t a i n f i x e d way? Jan: Oh, maybe the f i r s t couple of times you d i d i t , you were so r t of aware that you were l e a v i n g something out, but very q u i c k l y no. Very e a s i l y , though, you got set and w e l l there's t h i s , then there's t h i s , and then there's t h i s ; and i f you s t a r t e d i n the middle you didn't n e c e s s a r i l y know where you were. I n t . : Were you aware of the sound of your own voice? Jan: W e l l , i n the beginning when I s t a r t e d and t r y i n g t o concen-t r a t e on br i n g i n g the volume up and making i t s o r t of more b l a t a n t , making P a t t y ' s voice q u a l i t y more b i g , and a l s o the screaming, the sort of s t r a i g h t - o u t anger, I was r e a l l y conscious of my v o i c e . But a f t e r you pointed out that I was speaking very h i g h l y on one 156 l e v e l , i n a very high tone of v o i c e . I.wasn't aware of that u n t i l you d i d , but when you d i d point i t out I was q u i t e aware of i t , but I wasn't u n t i l you s a i d t h a t . I n t . : And d i d my remark help you or d i d i t make you more s e l f -conscious? Jan; Yes, i t helped, not immediately r i g h t then, but i n t h i n k -i n g about i t . No, come t o t h i n k of i t , d e f i n i t e l y i t helped because i t broke problems that you didn't know why they were happening. I n t . : You s a i d when we f i r s t s t a r t e d t o t a l k , t h a t there were f r i g h t e n i n g t h i n g s about the play - you e i t h e r f e l t t hat i t was f r i g h t e n i n g t o t h i n k people were l i k e t h a t or tha t they, i n f a c t , weren't l i k e t h a t ; I wasn't q u i t e sure what you were saying -that they could change suddenly from rage and could be taken s t r a i g h t out of i t by a chance word - d i d t h i s r e l a t e t o your own part p a r t i c u l a r l y ? Did these f e e l i n g s a r i s e from p l a y i n g Patty? Jan: Yeah, very much. F i r s t of a l l i t was just i n reading i t , but then i t s o r t of developed i n g e t t i n g i n t o that p a r t , t r y i n g t o understand her f a s t changes and her need t o so r t of destroy t h i n g s around her - very much, qu i t e a strong f e e l i n g . Sometimes I would walk out f e e l i n g j u s t drained out because of a l l that was going on. You f i g u r e i t ' s probably i n y o u r s e l f , that i t ' s not too close t o the su r f a c e , then suddenly i t i s . I t ' s sort of scarey. I n t . : Sometimes i t ' s due t o an inner r e s i s t a n c e too. I played a very angry part which I didn't do t e r r i b l y w e l l a c t u a l l y when I was perhaps a l i t t l e o l d e r than you. Mrs. Joe Gargery i n "Great Ex p e c t a t i o n s " * she i s f u r i o u s l y angry ne a r l y a l l the time and h o r r i b l e t o t h i s c h i l d , and I f o r c e d i t , r e a l l y , because I 157 couldn't get the anger up and t h i s was very d r a i n i n g . Did you have that sort of experience or d i d you f e e l that you d i d manage t o get the anger up and that t h i s was exhausting? Jan: W e l l , again the s t r a i g h t anger, i t was.forced and that was one kind of d r a i n i n g ; i t wasn't.a good f e e l i n g at a l l , and i t wasn't being e f f e c t i v e , which makes you f e e l even worse. But I was t a l k i n g more of emotions that I f e l t were - i t was more when I was r e a l l y understanding a l l that was th e r e , that i t was d r a i n -ing because i t was a l l t h e r e ; she meant i t t o be. I n t . : Yes, r i g h t . Do you f i n d i n an i m p r o v i s a t i o n that sometimes not having a t e x t impedes the expression of character? Jan: Yes, w e l l p e r s o n a l l y I tend t o l e t other people - I tend t o be quiet i n any s i t u a t i o n that i s new and d i f f e r e n t which most of the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s that we set up were. They were 'once-in-a-l i f e t i m e ' s i t u a t i o n s , not the Christmas scene we d i d , but other t h i n g s . So i t ' s more of a f i g h t i f you're t r y i n g t o have another type of ch a r a c t e r ; there's more problem t h e r e . You've got t o make y o u r s e l f do that - you can't say ' w e l l , I've got a l i n e here'. I n t . : Do you f e e l i t ' s e a s i e r t o l e t others take the lead i n the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s ? Jan: Not a c t u a l l y the l e a d ; w e l l you could say the lead or the d e f i n i n g r o l e . I n t . : Yes. W e l l , thanks very much. 158 I n t e r v i e w V I n t : You know I gave you the play before I cast i t , when you read i t d i d you want t o play any p a r t i c u l a r part? Dan: W e l l , i t was funny - I cast i t a l l out and the c a s t i n g was e x a c t l y the way i t turned out, and i n a way I wanted t o play e i t h e r Fak or Cone because i t was so completely d i f f e r e n t from me. But I was happy the way i t turned out anyways.. I n t . : Yes. Fak and Cone r e a l l y wanted to play Steve. Dan: Yes, which i s r e a l l y i n t e r e s t i n g . I n t . : One of the things which arose from one of the other i n t e r -views - i t was e i t h e r Fak or Cone - s a i d that they thought that Steve was a r e a l l y menacing or thr e a t e n i n g p a r t . Dan: Yeah, i t was. When,I f i r s t read i t I thought 'oh wowl i t would be so easy t o s o r t of frump out', you know. I n t . : But he didn't mean t h a t . I t h i n k he meant more that the part i t s e l f , t hat Steve threatened other people, that he threatened the audience, " r e l e a s e s f r u s t r a t i o n s . " Dan: I never thought of t h a t . I n t . : I t never occurred t o me t o see the guy as a menace - d i d i t occur t o you? Dan: I never got t h a t . I guess i t could be done, but I don't see him as a menace r e a l l y , e s p e c i a l l y him being a drummer, i t would r e a l l y completely change everything i f he was an absolute menace. I t h i n k he would be more apt to get i n i n the play h i m s e l f , l i k e doing l i t t l e t h i n g s i f he was more of a menace type f i g u r e . But I t h i n k i f he was a menace I don't t h i n k he'd be there t o s i t and watch and play once i n a w h i l e . 159 I n t . : Yes, I agree. I was r e a l l y i n t e r e s t e d i n t h i s q u i t e d i f f e r - , ent view of the p a r t . Dan: That's i n t e r e s t i n g a l l r i g h t , but no, i t never r e a l l y occurred t o me. I n t . : Did you l i k e the play? Dan: Yeah, I r e a l l y enjoyed i t . When I f i r s t read the s c r i p t I thought 'wow' i t would be great i f i t could r e a l l y be done but I r e a l l y had second doubts as t o whether i t could r e a l l y be p u l l e d o f f or not. I n t . : Yes, i t ' s one of those plays which i s r a t h e r l i k e reading a musical score and i t becomes suddenly a l i v e when i t ' s done. Dan: Yeah, and i t has t o be seen t o r e a l l y be appreciated, i n t . : Yes. How d i d you l e a r n your l i n e s ? Dan: Just be reading i t over and g e t t i n g the general thought of i t , because a l l I had r e a l l y was that big speech and I didn't want to s i t down and memorize i t l i n e by l i n e because I knew i t would sound ' l i n e y ' , because I had that problem from the beginning anyways, and I didn't want to get t h a t . So what I d i d was j u s t t o read i t i n the context of the s c r i p t , and read the f o l l o w i n g t h i n g s that would come on, read what came before i t and r e a l l y thought of the s i t u a t i o n , and j u s t walked i t out and s a i d i t , paraphrased i t , and became very f a m i l i a r w i t h i t , and kept on going over i t l i k e that u n t i l I knew i t . I n t . : D i d you f e e l you ever overcame t h i s problem? You s a i d you f e l t you were ' l i n e y ' ? Dan: Yeah, but i t took me q u i t e a w h i l e t o do i t , because once I had i t i t s t i l l kept on s l i p p i n g back once i n a w h i l e but i n the performance I t h i n k I got over i t . 160 I n t . : Was that having a l i v e audience? Dan; Yes, d e f i n i t e l y . That had so much t o do w i t h i t . I t r e a l l y made a world of d i f f e r e n c e , e s p e c i a l l y w i t h a long speech. I t ' s meant t o be played t o a l o t of people, and i t r e a l l y helped. I n t . : Yes. You didn't do much on the l i n e r e h e a r s a l s , d i d you? Dan: No, I didn't do any l i n e r e h e a r s a l s . I n t . : D i d you do much rehearsing at home on your own? Dan: J u s t i n paraphrasing i t and going over the speech and t h i n k i n g of c h a r a c t e r , and near the end I spent q u i t e a b i t of time going through the s c r i p t , and l i n i n g up places t o work i n the instruments and t h i n k i n g of how the beats would go and d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s . I n t . : Yes, that worked very w e l l . Did you f i n d any kind of cont r a s t between working at home and working here? Dan: Yeah. I n working here i t seems i t was q u i t e a b i t e a s i e r because everybody e l s e was working f o r you, even the simple f a c t of them concentrating and them r e c e i v i n g what you were doing, i t seemed you could get a l o t more out of i t . A l s o , when you were at home, you were the only person t o judge, whereas up here when you were doing something wrong they could spot i t and help you along, stop you g e t t i n g trapped i n t o something. I n t . : Do you f i n d i f you work at home you tend t o set the t h i n g up i m a g i n a t i v e l y so tha t when you come here t h i s kind of fan t a s y i s t r o u b l e d by the r e a l i t y of the r e h e a r s a l s i t u a t i o n ; d i d you f i n d t h i s s o rt of problem? Dan: Not r e a l l y , no. Because what I d i d , I j u s t s ort of imagined t a l k i n g t o d i f f e r e n t people and I didn't create too v i v i d a s i t u a t i o n because I didn't want t o be used t o one s i t u a t i o n and then be put i n another one. I didn't want t o f a l l i n t o that t r a p 161 e i t h e r . I n t . : G e t t i n g away from that - we d i d some pr e - r e h e a r s a l e x e r c i s e s -we d i d the Sound and Movement c i r c l e and we d i d other things w i t h Helen, that mask: t h i n g she d i d , and r e l a t i n g one-to-one copying what people d i d , and some t r u s t e x e r c i s e s before t h a t , you know people f a l l i n g i n t o each other's arms. They have t o be caught or they'd f a l l on the f l o o r ; and f e e l i n g hand-to-hand, that kind of t h i n g , and of course we d i d a l o t of i m p r o v i s a t i o n s . Of these s o r t s of e x e r c i s e s , can you say at a l l which you found h e l p f u l ? Dan: I t h i n k the Sound and Movement one was the best because you r e a l l y learned what e x a c t l y that other person was, what they were going t o do. You became accustomed t o them, p h y s i c a l l y and mentally. You knew what was going on i n t h e i r heads, what types of moves they were making, and you f e l t a l o t more secure working w i t h them. I n t . : That was the c i r c l e . Dan: Yes, and the t r u s t e x e r c i s e s were r e a l l y good, because they gave you a f e e l i n g of s e c u r i t y and so r t of brought the group together, which a l l the ex e r c i s e s d i d , and the i m p r o v i s a t i o n s . I n t . : Do you t h i n k the improvs. helped your a c t u a l a c t i n g s k i l l s ? Dan: Yeah, I t h i n k they do because you have t o t h i n k of d i f f e r e n t characters i n d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s q u i t e q u i c k l y . Because i t ' s r e a l l y easy t o be a so r t of blase c h a r a c t e r , and j u s t work more on the s i t u a t i o n . But i t takes you a w h i l e t o get i n t o them, l i k e I f e l t our f i r s t improvs. weren't q u i t e as good, as f a r as g e t t i n g the c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n and the spontaneity of the t h i n g . Doing an improv. and then going through a l i n e r e h e a r s a l shows you, you know what you've got t o reach, that s o r t of sound and the spontaneity 162 of the t h i n g . I n doing my speech and doing an improv. I r e a l l y n o t i c e d a d i f f e r e n c e - I knew what I had t o get. I n t . : So i f you were going i n t o another r e h e a r s a l s i t u a t i o n and you had your choice of which e x e r c i s e s were done, which would you choose? Dan: I'd choose the t r u s t e x e r c i s e s f i r s t and d e f i n i t e l y the Sound and Movement and I'd do some improvs. too, I t h i n k , t o bring the group c l o s e r . I t h i n k I'd s t a r t out w i t h that before I'd even attempt t o s t a r t working .on the play j u s t t o get the people working w i t h t h a t set of people, t o a l l e v i a t e any f e a r s or i n h i b i t i o n s that you have. I n t . : Yes. How d i d you f i n d the part p h y s i c a l l y ? D i d you f e e l p h y s i c a l l y comfortable? Dan: Yeah, because i t was the so r t of part I could mold around myself anyways. At f i r s t I f e l t q u i t e uncomfortable because I was p l a y i n g i t so clo s e t o me, and yet i n a way i t was so d i f f e r e n t . But a f t e r a w h i l e , as we became more accustomed t o i t , I f e l t q u i t e easy w i t h i t . I n t . : You didn't f e e l unrelaxed? Dan: No, there weren't any p h y s i c a l b a r r i e r s i n i t at a l l . I n t . : And v o c a l l y , were you aware of any v o c a l problems at a l l ? Dan: Just i n g e t t i n g v a r i a t i o n s i n the speech. I tended t o keep i t not r e a l l y monotone, but not r e a l l y l i v e l y e i t h e r . That came w i t h the. spontaneity of i t . I n t . : D id the paraphrasing help you? Dan: I t r e a l l y helped a l o t , e s p e c i a l l y f o r g e t t i n g the v a r i a t i o n s i n the voice q u a l i t y , and f o r g e t t i n g r i d of the ' l i n e y ' b i t , t o o , i t r e a l l y helped. 163 I n t . : Did you f i n d t h a t having a t e x t impeded the expression of f e e l i n g which you were able t o achieve i n other ways, l i k e i n impr o v i s a t i o n ? Dan: Yeah, i t i s hard r e a l l y t o take something t h a t ' s already w r i t t e n down because i t ' s not n a t u r a l , which makes the biggest d i f f e r e n c e , because what you're saying i n an improv. even though i t ' s a d i f f e r e n t character that you're t r y i n g t o get, i t ' s s t i l l coming out of your head and so i t ' s s t i l l going t o be n a t u r a l f o r you t o say t h a t . Yet w i t h the t e x t , i t ' s something that somebody e l s e has w r i t t e n and somebody el s e has s a i d , and f o r you to say that i n a n a t u r a l way takes a b i t of work. I n t . : Yes. On the other hand i n an i m p r o v i s a t i o n , d i d you ever f i n d that having t o look f o r l i n e s impeded the expression? Dan: Yes, t h a t ' s t r u e too, because l o t s of times you wouldn't r e a l l y know what t o say. Sometimes i t was o f t e n funny i n d i f f e r e n t improvs. - I know i n two d i f f e r e n t improvs. I found myself saying e x a c t l y the same l i n e s . I n t . : Yes. Did you f i n d that doing the imp r o v i s a t i o n s helped w i t h the part? Dan: Yeah, when I f i r s t brought them home I was having t r o u b l e g e t t i n g the re l a x e d and very casual q u a l i t i e s that Steve has t o have, and I found that p l a y i n g the bongoes, j u s t sort of t a l k i n g , j u s t even holding them without even p l a y i n g them, i t was l i k e a l l the nervousness that I had i n me sort of went r i g h t i n t o the bongoes, which was r e a l l y , r e a l l y good. I n t . : I t 'released f r u s t r a t i o n s ' ? Dan: Yeah, i t r e a l l y d i d . I t was r e a l l y amazing, l i k e a l l the s t a t i c I had i n me j u s t s o r t of went i n and I got i t a l l out which was r e a l l y good, r e a l l y h e l p f u l . When I f i r s t s t a r t e d p l a y i n g i t , 161* I put on a record : t o s t a r t out w i t h , and s t a r t e d b a t t e r i n g away t o the r e c o r d ; then I took i t o f f and j u s t s t a r t e d b a t t e r i n g away and I r e a l i z e d t h a t t h i s probably wouldn't be something Steve would be doing. For one thing., Steve probably wouldn't be l i s t e n i n g t o th a t type of music, and so I thought w e l l , I won't even t h i n k of any music, I ' l l j u s t s o r t of get i n t o the character then I ' l l p i c k them up and s t a r t p l a y i n g them. I t was sort of a slow, rhythmic, jazzy-type beat because I sort of had imagined that Steve would be a jazzy-type musician and r e a l l y i t was a c t u a l l y an i n c r e d i b l e change. I n t . : Did the cymbal have any e f f e c t on t h i s ? Dan: Yeah, because the cymbal came very e a r l y and I so r t of walked out and saw a l l those people out there and I had j u s t s a i d a few l i n e s and j u s t s o r t o f , smash - l i k e everything went r i g h t . I n t . : Good. Okay, thanks very much. 165 APPENDIX B Texts Used f o r A u d i t i o n s  OUR TOWN by Thornton W i l d e r . Act I I 1 How do such t h i n g s begin? George and Emily are going t o show you now the conversation they had when they f i r s t knew that ... that ... as the saying goes ... they were meant f o r one another. But before they do i t I want you to t r y and remember what i t was l i k e when you were young, when you were f i f t e e n . o r s i x t e e n . For some reason i t i s very hard t o do: those days when even the l i t t l e t h i n g s i n l i f e could be almost too e x c i t i n g t o bear. And p a r t i c u l a r l y the days when you were f i r s t i n l o v e ; when you were l i k e a person sleep-walking, and you didn't q u i t e see the s t r e e t you were i n , and didn't q u i t e hear everything that was s a i d t o you. You're j u s t a l i t t l e b i t crazy. W i l l you remember t h a t , please? Now t h e y ' l l be coming out of High School at three o'clock. George has j u s t been e l e c t e d P r e s i d e n t of the J u n i o r C l a s s , and as i t ' s June, that means h e ' l l be P r e s i d e n t of the Senior Class a l l next year. And Emily's j u s t been e l e c t e d Secretary and Treasurer. I don't have t o t e l l you how important that i s . He places a board across the backs of two c h a i r s , p a r a l l e l  t o the f o o t l i g h t s , and places two high s t o o l s behind i t . ^Three Plays by Thornton W i l d e r , Harper Bros, p u b l i s h e r , New York 1957, p. 60. 166 This i s the counter of Mr. Morgan's drugstore. A l l ready1 E m i l y , c a r r y i n g an armful of imaginary-scheol-books.  comes along Main S t r e e t from the l e f t . E m ily: I can'tj L o u i s e . I've got t o go home. Good-by. Oh, E a r n e s t i n e l E a r n e s t i n e ! Can you come over t o n i g h t and do Algebra? I d i d the f i r s t and t h i r d i n Study H a l l . No, they're not hard. But, E a r n e s t i n e , that Caesar's awful hard. I don't see why we have t o do a t h i n g l i k e t h a t . Come over about seven. T e l l your mother you have t o . G'by. G'by, Helen. G'by, Fred. George T a l s o c a r r y i n g books, catches UP w i t h her. George: Can I c a r r y your books home f o r you, Emily? Emily: C o l d l y . Thank you. She gives them t o him. George: Excuse me a minute, Emily. — S a y , Bob, get everything ready. I ' l l be there i n a quarter of an hour. I f I'm a l i t t l e l a t e s t a r t p r a c t i c e anyway. And give Herb some long high ones. H i s eye needs a l o t of p r a c t i c e . Seeya l a t e r . Emily: Good-by, L i z z y . 167 George: Good-by, L i z z y . — I ' m a w f u l l y glad you were e l e c t e d , t o o , Emi l y . Emily: Thank you. They have been standing on Main S t r e e t , almost against  the back w a l l . George i s about t o take the f i r s t steps  towards the audience when he stops again and says: George: E m i l y , why are you mad at me? Emily: I'm not mad at you. George: You ... you t r e a t me so funny. Emily: W e l l , I might as w e l l say i t r i g h t out, George. I don't l i k e the whole change t h a t ' s come over you i n the l a s t year. I'm so r r y i f that hurts your f e e l i n g s , but I've ju s t got t o t e l l the t r u t h and shame the d e v i l . George: I'm a w f u l l y s o r r y , E m i l y . Wha-a-what do you mean? Emily: W e l l , up t o a year ago I used t o l i k e you a l o t . And I used t o watch you as you d i d everything ... because we'd been f r i e n d s so l o n g - . . . and then you began spending a l l your time at base-b a l l ... and you never even spoke t o anybody any more; not even t o your own f a m i l y you didn't ... and, George, i t ' s a f a c t , you've got awful conceited and stuck-up, and a l l the g i r l s say so. They may not say so t o your f a c e , but t h a t ' s what they say 168 about you behind your back, and i t hurts me t o hear them say i t , but I've got t o agree -with them a l i t t l e . I'm s o r r y i f i t hurts your f e e l i n g s ... but I can't be s o r r y I s a i d i t . George: I ... I'm glad you s a i d i t , E mily. I never thought that such a t h i n g was happening t o me. I guess i t ' s hard f o r a f e l l a not t o have f a u l t s creep i n t o h i s c h a r a c t e r . They take a step or two i n s i l e n c e , then stand s t i l l i n misery. Emily: I always expect a man t o be p e r f e c t and I t h i n k he should be. George: Oh ... I don't t h i n k i t ' s p o s s i b l e t o be p e r f e c t , Emily. Emily: W e l l , my f a t h e r i s , and as f a r as I can see your f a t h e r i s . There's no reason on e a r t h why you shouldn't be, too. 169 JULIUS CAESAR by W i l l i a m Shakespeare, Act I I I , Scene I I , Lin e s 12 - hi. Brutus: Be p a t i e n t t i l l the l a s t . Romans, countrymen, and l o v e r s , hear me f o r my cause, and be s i l e n t , that you may hear. B e l i e v e me f o r mine honour, and have respect t o mine honour, that you may b e l i e v e . Censure me i n your •wisdom, and a-wake your senses, that you may the bet t e r judge. I f there be any i n t h i s assembly, any dear f r i e n d of C a e s a r 1 s , t o him I say that Brutus' love t o Caesar was no l e s s than h i s . I f then that f r i e n d demand why Brutus rose against Caesar, t h i s i s my answer: Not that I loved Caesar l e s s , but that I loved Rome more. Had you r a t h e r Caesar were l i v i n g , and d i e a l l s l a v e s , than that Caesar were dead, t o l i v e a l l f r e e men? As Caesar loved me, I weep f o r him; as he was f o r t u n a t e , I r e j o i c e at i t ; as he was v a l i a n t , I honour him; but, as he was ambitious, I slew him. There i s t e a r s , f o r h i s l o v e ; j o y , f o r h i s f o r t u n e ; honour, f o r h i s v a l o u r ; and death, f o r h i s ambition. Who i s here so base, t h a t would be a bondman? I f any, speak; f o r him have I offended. Who i s here so. rude, that would not be a Roman? I f any, speak; f o r him have I offended. Who i s here so v i l e , that w i l l not love h i s country? I f any, speak; f o r him have I offended. I pause f o r a r e p l y . KING JOHN, by'William Shakespeare, Act I I , Scene I I . (The French King's P a v i l i o n . ) Enter Constance. A r t h u r , and S a l i s b u r y . Constance: Gone t o be married I gone t o swear a peace I F a l s e blood t o f a l s e blood join'd I gone t o be f r i e n d s ! S h a l l Lewis have Blanche, and Blanche those provinces? I t i s not so; thou hast misspoke, misheard; Be w e l l a d v i s ' d , t e l l o'er thy t a l e again. I t cannot be;, thou dost but say ' t i s so. I t r u s t I may not t r u s t thee, f o r thy word I s but the v a i n breath of a common man; B e l i e v e me, I do not believe thee, man: I have a king's oath t o the co n t r a r y . Thou s h a l t be punish'd f o r thus f r i g h t i n g me, For I am s i c k and capable of f e a r s , Oppress'd w i t h wrongs and t h e r e f o r e f u l l of f e a r s , A widow, husbandless, subject t o f e a r s , A woman, n a t u r a l l y born t o f e a r s ; And though thou now confess thou d i d s t but j e s t With my vex'd s p i r i t s I cannot take a t r u c e , But they w i l l quake and tremble a l l t h i s day. What dost thou mean by shaking of thy head? Why dost thou look so sadly on my son? What means that hand upon that breast of t h i n e ? Why holds t h i n e eye that lamentable rheum. L i k e a proud r i v e r peering o'er h i s bounds? Be these sad signs confirmers of thy words? Then speak again; not a l l thy former t a l e . But t h i s one word, whether thy t a l e be t r u e . 172 APPENDIX C - AUDITIONS  Questions a t F i r s t A u d i t i o n 1. Age? 2. What previous drama experience? Parts? 3. Any experience of improvising? k. Want to go on the stage? 5 . Want to do amateur dramatics? 6. Want t o major i n theatre'here? 7. I n t e r e s t e d i n a c t i n g i n the department here? 8. What year as student? Questions A f t e r the F i r s t A u d i t i o n 1. How d i d you f e e l about the a u d i t i o n ? 2. Did you l i k e the t e x t s ? 3- Were you already f a m i l i a r w i t h e i t h e r of them? h. Did you p r e f e r one t o the other? Questions a f t e r the Second A u d i t i o n 1. How d i d you f e e l about t h i s a u d i t i o n s compared w i t h the f i r s t one? 2. How d i d you work on the t e x t ? 3. Were you able t o do what you wanted t o do? Did your p e r f o r -mance come cl o s e t o your conception of the part? h. How d i d you react t o the t e x t s a f t e r you had become f a m i l i a r w i t h them? 5 . Did you l i k e them? Did you p r e f e r one t o the other? I asked f u r t h e r questions as they arose i n accordance w i t h answers given. 173 Bob. 18. F i r s t Year. Has done ten years of H o l i d a y Theatre courses. Was i n the movie The Education of P h i l i s t i n e . Small part i n the Playhouse productions Christmas At The  Market P l a c e . Whitney i n L i f e w i t h F a t h e r . Fancourt Babberley i n Charley's Aunt. The General i n Romanoff and J u l i e t . Jonathan i n Arsenic and Old Lace. Jean i n Rhinoceros (Ionesco): School productions. Has done drama courses at School. Does not yet know whether he w i l l major i n Theatre s or whether t o become p r o f e s s i o n a l . Wants t o do a c t i n g courses here. L i k e s Comedy. A u d i t i o n . Our Town. More experienced and w i t h some t r a i n i n g . Loud v o i c e . Put himself across s t r o n g l y as Stage Manager. S l i g h t l y c o u n t r i f i e d accent. Strong. F a i r l y heavy. Could sound n a t u r a l , not ' l i n e y ' when reading. Read George as w e l l . I n t e l l i g e n t , but not i d e a l c a s t i n g . J u l i u s Caesar. Eloquent. I n t e l l i g e n t i n an i n s t i n c t i v e way. Not P a t r i c i a n , but t h i s i s f i r s t r eading. Answers t o Questions 1. Said he was very nervous. Always i s befpre he s t a r t s anything. 2. L i k e d doing the Stage Manager i n Our Town. 17 L 3. Had read i t before. L i k e d the Shakespeare t e x t . ^f. Could not compare t e x t s or say which he pr e f e r r e d doing. Second A u d i t i o n . Our Town. Stage Manager: easy movement and manner. Overacts. Did too much, but c e r t a i n l y has something, t o r e s t r a i n . As George: took time t o set stage as he wanted i t . Too heavy f o r the part but i n t e l l i g e n t reading and d i d i t e a s i l y . As Brutus. Eloquent. Did too much, but could be e f f e c t i v e . Took great advantage of the time between the a u d i t i o n s t o work on the t e x t s , and put e f f o r t and imagination i n t o i t . Answers t o Questions 1. Less nervous than previously,' but f i n d s he does not do so w e l l when l e s s nervous. I s not nervous when a c t u a l l y on the stage. 2. He s p l i t Our Town i n t o s e c t i o n s . What i s George l i k e ? Aimed at consistency. Worked out blocking i n d e t a i l . Played f o r George's a t h l e t i c i n t e r e s t s . E x t r o v e r t e d performance. Took a t h l e t i c pose which d i s i n t e g r a t e d under Emily's a t t a c k . Stage Manager: aimed at naturalness and r e l a t i n g t o audience. The look of spontaneity. Brutus. T r i e d t o be a l e s s good speaker than Antony. T r i e d to be a p o l i t i c i a n making an e f f o r t t o reach an unsympathetic p u b l i c . Did i t a l l aloud. Worked about two-and-a-half hours on a l l three p a r t s . 3. F e l t a big gap between what he imagined and a c t u a l l y d i d . I s never s a t i s f i e d w i t h h i s work. h. & 5. At f i r s t , p r e f e r r e d working on Our Town, because he 175 s t a r t e d o f f -with i t and found i t ^ d i f f i c u l t t o -wrench himself out of that mood i n t o Shakespeare. Though a c t u a l l y much pre f e r s J u l i u s Caesar. L i k e d doing George best and thought he di d i t best. A c t u a l l y he -was most convincing as the Stage Manager. General comment: Speaks very f l u e n t l y . Hope he w i l l j o i n the p r o j e c t . 176 Jan. 17. F i r s t year. H o l i d a y Theatre c r e a t i v e drama f o r two years. Also New Focus, (see Ann's a u d i t i o n . ) Acted at s c h o o l , i n chorus of the Mikado. O l i v i a i n T w e l f t h N i g h t . Did many imp r o v i s a t i o n s i n H o l i d a y Theatre. Expects a c t i n g t o be side i n t e r e s t . Main i n t e r e s t s are education, s o c i o l o g y , community planning. Audition Our Town. Very appealing as E m i l y . Young. I n t e l l i g e n t r e a d i n g . King -John. Nervous. A l o t of v e r b a l mistakes. Not a Constance. Not q u i t e dominant, voice high and of medium s t r e n g t h . Answers t o Questions 1. Quite apprehensive of coming. I t b u i l t up more. I s always nervous of a u d i t i o n s . Was l e s s nervous f o r t h i s than some other s i t u a t i o n s . 2 . L i k e d the Our Town t e x t and doing i t . Fun. L i k e d the f e e l i n g i n the words of Shakespeare, but could not Imagine what Constance r e a l l y f e l t l i k e . 3. Was u n f a m i l i a r w i t h t e x t s . *f. P r e f e r r e d doing Shakespeare and thought she d i d t h i s best. Second A u d i t i o n E m i l y , d i d i t t w i c e , f i r s t alone then w i t h a student. F i r s t time: has improved, would make an e x c e l l e n t Emily. Second time: r e l a t e d t o George w e l l . She almost knows the t e x t by heart. 177 Constance: good attempt, much improved. Quite a l o t of f e e l i n g . Took i t too f a s t . Not a Constance. Second time: took i t more s l o w l y . Much more e f f e c t i v e . Good a c t r e s s . Young q u a l i t y . Took advantage of the time between the a u d i t i o n s t o work hard. Voice sounds somewhat unspontaneous though always gets the sense over. Answers t o Questions 1. Not nervous. F e l t she d i d both parts too f a s t . Did not l i k e the way she d i d E m i l y . F e l t t h i n g s went bet t e r t h i s time. 2. Read such parts of King John and Our Town as she thought were re l e v a n t t o the p a r t i c u l a r scenes. Worked out the character of each. Did i t aloud mostly, some t o h e r s e l f . Emily t r o u b l e d her. Couldn't bel i e v e i n her. Thought her d e l i v e r y of E's long speech too monotonous. 3- F e l t there was a gap between her conception of the parts and t h e i r outward expression, e s p e c i a l l y i n movement. k. & 5. L i k e d Constance more and more as she worked at i t . L i k e d Emily l e s s and l e s s . Couldn't f e e l w i t h Emily. Shakespeare r e a l l y hard, a l o t of work. Enjoyed i t . General Comment: Talks e a s i l y and c l e a r l y . Very p o s s i b l e . Would l i k e her t o j o i n the p r o j e c t . She was mistaken though about what she d i d best, unquestionably E m i l y . 178 Mike. 21. T h i r d year No previous a c t i n g experience. Doing f i l m course and Theatre 120. Has not thought of becoming p r o f e s s i o n a l . A u d i t i o n Stage Manager i n Our Town. I n t e l l i g e n t reading. Not very l i v e l y . Needs t o p r o j e c t p e r s o n a l i t y much more. Voice not stro n g . S e n s i t i v e reading. J u l i u s Caesar. I n t e l l i g e n t , but too q u i e t . Inward t u r n i n g . Did not put i t across t o the crowd at a l l . Answers t o Questions 1. P e l t m i l d l y nervous beforehand. 2. L i k e d Our Town t e x t . F e l t n a t u r a l w i t h i t . 3. Was not f a m i l i a r w i t h e i t h e r t e x t . ' Could not empathize w i t h Brutus. Too d i s t a n t from own experience. Second A u d i t i o n Our Town. Quite good, has ob v i o u s l y worked at i t , but s t i l l needs t o p r o j e c t voice and p e r s o n a l i t y much more. Brutus. D i t t o . I n t r o s p e c t i v e but h i g h l y i n t e l l i g e n t . Might be more spontaneous when he i s p l a y i n g a p a r t , reading r a t h e r V i s u a l 1 . Answers t o Questions 1. Not nervous. More concerned about how i t went. L i k e d t h i s a u d i t i o n much b e t t e r . 2. Read t e x t s out loud but had t o do t h i s i n bathroom owing t o presence of room-mate. 3 . A gap between h i s aims and what he d i d . k. Got t i r e d of Our Town but enjoyed i t , e s p e c i a l l y the Stage Manager which seemed r e a l . Did not get t i r e d of the Brutus speech, worked at i t hard and enjoyed doing i t . Paraphrased i t and t r i e d d i f f e r e n t ways of doing i t . Only one way of doing Our Town. Was i n i t i a l l y nervous of the Shakespeare t e x t . General Comment: Very p o s s i b l e . Speaks f a i r l y f l u e n t l y and e a s i l y . Would l i k e him t o j o i n p r o j e c t . 180 Dan. 18. F i r s t year. I n t e r e s t e d i n Theatre of the Absurd and -wrote an Absurd play -with a f r i e n d . Made a f i l m which won second p r i z e i n B. C. contest f o r High Schools , 1969. Drama courses w i t h a c t i n g , grades 9 and 11. Studied w i t h D o r i s C h i l c o t t as a c t i n g teacher. Did l o t s of i m p r o v i s a t i o n s . Acted i n An Enemy of the People. The Late Christopher Bean. Might major i n Theatre. I n t e r e s t e d i n f i l m making; any aspect of t h i s . Does not know yet i f he would l i k e t o be a p r o f e s s i o n a l a c t o r . A u d i t i o n v Our Town. Has a n a t u r a l manner but d i d not p r o j e c t e i t h e r voice or p e r s o n a l i t y n e a r l y enough f o r the Stage Manager. Quite good as George. Weak v o i c e , almost i n a u d i b l e at times, but n a t u r a l most of the time. J u l i u s Caesar. Made good sense, but same problem as w i t h Stage Manager. Answers t o Questions; 1. Nervous of the a u d i t i o n . 2. P r e f e r r e d reading Shakespeare t o Thornton W i l d e r , because the Shakespeare t e x t i s more flamboyant. 3. Already knew Our Town but not the Shakespeare. k. Nervous of the Our Town t e x t . F e l t at home w i t h Shakespeare. Second A u d i t i o n Our Town. Stage Manager: i n t e l l i g e n t and n a t u r a l but very 182 qui e t and inward-turning. Told him t o do i t again and t o imagine he was addressing a huge audience and t o p r o j e c t himself on a l a r g e s c a l e . He r e -mained much the same. T h i r d time: projected r a t h e r more. J u l i u s Caesar. Very l e v e l and not at a l l r h e t o r i c a l . Made some suggestions t h a t he picked up second time around. But remained l e v e l and shy. Undoubtedly has p o t e n t i a l as a c t o r . A n a t u r a l , though-quiet manner and unusual q u a l i t y . Not ' l i n e y * . Answers t o Questions: 1. Less nervous t h i s time. 2. Worked i n head, not out l o u d . Did not do much pr e p a r a t i o n . 3. F e l t he d i d poorly i n Our Town and better i n Shakespeare. P r e f e r r e d the l a t t e r . h. & 5. Found J u l i u s Caesar e a s i e r t o grasp than Our Town which he thought had s u b t l e t i e s he h a d . f a i l e d t o grasp. Did not l i k e Our Town; too sent i m e n t a l . General Comment: Finds i t d i f f i c u l t t o t a l k about himself f l u e n t l y . Has a f r e s h and unconventional approach t o h i s work. I s very p o s s i b l e . 183 Ann. 18 F i r s t year. T a l l . Worked -with Holiday Theatre course. 'New Focus', f o r Vancouver Y's. Improvised a play f o r c h i l d r e n one year. Every day, four-week Summer School. Was i n Under M i l k Wood. Played Ismene i n Anouilh's Antigone. Was i n part of The Sport of My Mad Mother i n Hol i d a y Theatre. Drama Course i n High School i n Toronto. They d i d The D i a r y  of Ann Frank. She played Ann. J u l i e t i n Balcony and P o t i o n Scene from Romeo and J u l i e t . To audience. Calpurnia i n performance of J u l i u s Caesar. I s i n one-act play now i n r e h e a r s a l , d i r e c t e d by a graduate student. Could be i n t e r e s t e d i n being a p r o f e s s i o n a l . Audition, Our Town. Too l a r g e a p e r s o n a l i t y f o r Emily but i n t e l l i g e n t r e a d i n g . King John. Has genuine emotion. B ig p h y s i c a l l y . Came over as f a i r l y heavy. Could play middle-aged women. Strong. Read f l u e n t l y . Strong v o i c e . A b i t given t o a s p e c i a l 'stage' v o i c e , though not overwhelmingly. Answers t o Questions: 1. F e l t a l l r i g h t about a u d i t i o n . Enjoyed i t . 2. L i k e d the t e x t s but not the part of Emily. 3 . Knew Our Town but not King John. h. P r e f e r r e d Constance t o Em i l y . 18k Second A u d i t i o n Our Town. Much the same comment as before, but more p o l i s h e d performance. N a t u r a l f e e l i n g . Did i t w i t h George the second time; picked up th i n g s p r e v i o u s l y missed. King John. Too f a s t but q u i t e emotional. Not too much change from previous a u d i t i o n . Second time through: Much qe.tter. Picked up and used sugges-t i o n s about mood changes. Can l e a r n from experience. Answers t o Questions: 1. F e l t a l l r i g h t about a u d i t i o n i n g . 2. Worked on t e x t s l i n e by l i n e at home. Worked s i l e n t l y f o r two or three sessions and once aloud. 3. Managed t o bring what she imagined and what she was able t o do p h y s i c a l l y , reasonably c l o s e . k. & !?• L i k e d working on both t e x t s ; s l i g h t l y p r e f e r r e d Constance. I s nervous i f presented w i t h a Shakespeare t e x t . General Comment: Fluent i n conversation; wide vocabulary. L i v e l y manner. Has worked q u i t e hard on t e x t . Good p o s s i b i l i t y . Would l i k e her t o j o i n p r o j e c t . (Ann l e f t the p r o j e c t a f t e r the f i r s t as she went i n t o a main stage production.) 185 G i l l i a n . 18. Second Year. Dark, t a l l i s h , thin. Worked back stage at School. Very l i t t l e acting experience. Is doing the 300 in Mrs. Prothero's section. Is majoring in theatre and Fine Arts. Acting primary interest, but doubts i f she could become professional. Audition Our Town. Slightly spinsterish. Lively and intelligent reading. Not ideally cast as Emily. Voice has interesting soft quality, plus audibility. King John. Best Constance so far. Nervy quality implied well. Didn't rush i t . Highly thoughtful reading. Answers to Questions: 1. Looked on audition as youthful exercise. Not nervous. 2. Enjoyed texts but found shifting her age from Emily to Constance d i f f i c u l t . 3. Unfamiliar with both plays. k. Preferred Shakespeare. Second Audition Our Town. Two readings. Better with George standing i n . Related to him quite directly. Intelligent but not an ideal Emily. Some forced unnatural intonations. King John. Good but emotion forced. Indicated changes of mood well, but not sincerely. Second reading: better, less forced, quieter. More convincing. Put a lot of work into this audition. 186 Answers t o Q u e s t i o n s : 1. F e l t b e t t e r t h a n l a s t t i m e , but good bo th t i m e s . 2. Saw t h e c h a r a c t e r o f C o n s t a n c e c l e a r l y , t a p e d h e r r e a d i n g o f i t t h r e e t i m e s . No ted t h e changes o f mood and a t t i t u d e i n t h e t e x t and t r i e d t o keep them i n the p e r f o r m a n c e . P l a y e d t a p e back and t r i e d t o keep i m p r o v e m e n t s . Read t h e who le p l a y o f Our Town t o get c o n t e x t . Spoke b o t h t e x t s a l o u d a t home. 3 . D i d not f e e l as E m i l y t h a t she a c h i e v e d what she r e a l l y f e l t about t h e p a r t . Thought E m i l y was unhappy , a t t i m e s m i s e r a b l e . Had s u b t l e r e a d i n g o f t h e c h a r a c t e r . h. & 5 . D i d n o t l i k e Our Town much a t f i r s t , but s l i g h t l y warmer t o w a r d s i t a f t e r w o r k i n g on i t . L i k e d t h e Shakespea re s c e n e . Tense w i t h a w i d e r ange i n i t . Not n e r v o u s o f t a c k l i n g a S h a k e s p e a r e a n t e x t . G e n e r a l Comment: Speaks f l u e n t l y w i t h w i d e v o c a b u l a r y . Not a s t e r e o t y p e d a p p r o a c h t o t e x t s . Would l i k e h e r t o j o i n t h e p r o j e c t . 187 Dan. 17. F i r s t year. Dark, medium hei g h t . Drama Courses at School, and has taken part i n s e v e r a l school p l a y s . Freddie Beanstalk, Hobsoris Choice. Dr. Swinford i n David and L i s a . (Dr. S. a middle-aged p s y c h i a t r i s t . ) Demetrius i n Midsummer Night's Dream, scene from, plus othe r p a r t s . A l s o i m p r o v i s a t i o n s and mimes t o audience. A l s o -worked at school on short scenes, mimes, accents. W i l l major i n Theatre i f grades good enough. Might consider a p r o f e s s i o n a l career on the stage. A u d i t i o n Our Town. I n t e l l i g e n t reading of both parts but c u r i o u s l y l a c k i n g i n ch a r a c t e r . Easy manner f o r the Stage Manager. Could speak out c l e a r l y t o audience. •Julius Caesar. I n t e l l i g e n t reading of Brutus but not much c o n v i c t i o n . Voice medium l i g h t , very a u d i b l e . Answers t o Questions: 1. Nervous at s t a r t . 2. L i k e d t e x t s but p r e f e r r e d Our Town. 3. Already knew Our Town. k. P r e f e r r e d doing the Stage Manager t o George. Does not l i k e reading Shakespeare and p r e f e r r e d doing Our Town. L i k e s emotional p a r t s . Second A u d i t i o n Our Town. I n t e l l i g e n t reading as Stage Manager, s l i g h t l y stagey v o i c e . Over-acted a l i t t l e . Good presence and appearance. S t i f f as George but got the young q u a l i t y and the nervousness. D i d Our Town again w i t h an Emil y . Much b e t t e r . Related q u i t e 188 w e l l t o her. Not a spontaneous v o i c e and manner, but i s competent. J u l i u s Caesar. Brutus:, does not seem t o have taken too much advantage of a v a i l a b l e time t o go over t h i s . He s a i d he was not convinced of Brutus' p o s i t i o n . Answers t o Questions;-1. F e l t q u i t e easy about a u d i t i o n . 2 . Worked on t e x t , r e a d i n g i t through mostly t o h i m s e l f . 3. F e l t he could not do what he wanted. h. & 5« P r e f e r r e d doing the Stage Manager. Nervous of Shakespeare. General Comment. Can T a l k f a i r l y e a s i l y about h i s views. Good p o s s i b i l i t y . 189 Jeanine. 17. F i r s t year. Dark, medium hei g h t . Good-looking. Gave a l o t of a t t e n t i o n t o Theatre i n School. Three years of a c t i n g i n grades 10, 11 and 12, i m p r o v i s a t i o n s too. One year d i r e c t i n g i n drama course Grade 12. W r i t i n g s c r i p t s i n Grade 12. Wide v a r i e t y of parts i n c l u d i n g E l a i n e i n A r s e n i c and Old Lace.. Was.in The Land of Oz, and The S o l d i e r . Leading p a r t s . V i l l a i n e s s i n a musical melodrama; been i n s e v e r a l one-act p l a y s , done monologues. Has acted i n French. Would l i k e t o major i n Theatre here i f grades good enough. I s c o n s i d e r i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l stage. A u d i t i o n Our Town. Would be w e l l cast as Emily. Very competent. Not s u b t l e . Managed t o get the s l i g h t l y b i t c h y q u a l i t y . C l e a r , h i g h voice but not a spontaneous d e l i v e r y . King John. Very f a s t and l i g h t . Not at a l l the heavy emotion. Seemed scared of i t . Not a Constance. Answers t o Questions: 1. Not nervous, s l i g h t l y tense, curious about what was going on. 2. Our Town. ' N i c e 1 , not c h a l l e n g i n g , s a i d i t was not complicated. Character easy t o get i n t o . L i k e d the Shakespeare t e x t , thought Constance d i f f i c u l t , and the s i t u a t i o n , though ex p l a i n e d , not c l e a r . 3. Was f a m i l i a r already w i t h Our Town. k. Did not p r e f e r one t e x t over the other, but i d e n t i f i e d more 190 e a s i l y -wi th E m i l y t h a n C o n s t a n c e . Second A u d i t i o n . Some improvement i n E m i l y and g e n e r a l l y g o o d . Would be an e f f e c t i v e and competent E m i l y . C o n s t a n c e much, much i m p r o v e d . Has u s e d i n t e r v e n i n g t i m e • w e l l , managed t o ge t a b i t a n g r y . D i d i t a g a i n . E m o t i o n a l t o n e r a i s e d , bes t a t a n g e r . Not p r o f o u n d . Used t h e t i m e w e l l between a u d i t i o n s . Answers t o Q u e s t i o n s ; 1. L e s s l i k e an a u d i t i o n , she t h o u g h t . F e l t she was h e r e - t o l e a r n some th ing and had done s o . 2. Worked on m o t i v a t i o n o f c h a r a c t e r i n bo th c a s e s , changes o f e m o t i o n . Spoke i t a l o u d most o f t h e t i m e . 3 . He r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f i t was more i n t e n s e and v i v i d t h a n she was a b l e t o r e p r o d u c e . h. & 5- Found Our Town much e a s i e r t h a n C o n s t a n c e but en joyed c h a l l e n g e o f l a t t e r . G e n e r a l Comment. V e r y p o s s i b l e . Spoke e a s i l y and f l u e n t l y . APPENDIX D' 191 T e x t s o f P a s s a g e s Read i n O r a l R e a d i n g I 1 . M r . Musgrove was a Pos tman i n a v i l l a g e c a l l e d Pagnum M o s s . M r . and M r s . Musgrove l i v e d i n a house c a l l e d F u c h s i a C o t t a g e . I t was c a l l e d F u c h s i a C o t t a g e because i t had a f u c h s i a hedge r o u n d i t . I n . t h e f r o n t ga rden t h e y kep t a cow c a l l e d N i n a , and i n t h e back g a r d e n t h e y grew s t r a w b e r r i e s . . . n o t h i n g e l s e but s t r a w b e r r i e s . -Now M r . Musgrove was no o r d i n a r y . p o s t m a n ; f o r i n s t e a d o f w a l k i n g o r t r u n d l i n g about on a b i c y c l e , he f l e w a round i n a H e l i c o p t e r . And i n s t e a d o f p u s h i n g l e t t e r s i n t h r o u g h l e t t e r -b o x e s , he t o s s e d them i n t o p e o p l e ' s w i n d o w s , s i n g i n g as he d i d s o : 'Wake u p l Wake u p ! F o r morn ing i s h e r e ! ' Thus p e o p l e were a b l e t o r e a d t h e i r l e t t e r s q u i e t l y i n bed w i t h o u t l i t t e r i n g them u n t i d i l y o v e r t h e b r e a k f a s t t a b l e . 1 2. T r a v e r s i n g t h e l o n g and mat ted g a l l e r y , I descended t h e s l i p p e r y s t e p s o f o a k ; t h e n I g a i n e d t h e h a l l : I h a l t e d t h e r e a m i n u t e ; I l o o k e d a t some p i c t u r e s on t h e w a l l (one , I remember r e p r e s e n t e d a g r i m man i n a c u i r a s s , and one a l a d y w i t h powdered h a i r and a p e a r l n e c k l a c e ) , a t a b ronze lamp pendant f r o m t h e c e i l i n g , a t a g r e a t c l o c k whose case was o f oak c u r i o u s l y c a r v e d , and ebony b l a c k w i t h t i m e and r u b b i n g . E v e r y t h i n g appea red v e r y s t a t e l y and i m p o s i n g t o me; but t h e n I was so l i t t l e accus tomed t o g r a n d e u r . The h a l l - d o o r , w h i c h was "hf. H . Drummond, The F l y i n g P o s t m a n , i n A G o l d e n L a n d e d i t e d by James R e e v e s , C o n s t a b l e and C o . , L o n d o n , 1 9 5 8 , p . 2k^. h a l f of g l a s s , stood open; I stepped over the t h r e s h o l d . I t was a . f i n e autumn morning; the e a r l y sun shone s e r e n e l y over em-browned groves and s t i l l , green f i e l d s ; advancing onto the lawn, I looked up and surveyed the f r o n t of the mansion. I t was three s t o r e y s h i g h , of p r o p o r t i o n s not v a s t , though c o n s i d e r a b l e ; a gentleman's manor-house, not a nobleman's seat: battlements round the top gave i t a p i c t u r e s q u e l o o k . I t s gray f r o n t stood out w e l l from the background of a rookery, whose cawing tenants were not on the wing.^ 3. (Women.) " I t must be magnificent t o have the consciousness of a goddess without ever doing a t h i n g t o j u s t i f y i t . " "Give me a goddess's work t o do; and I w i l l do i t . I w i l l even stoop t o a queen's work i f you w i l l share the throne w i t h me. But do not pretend t h a t people become great by doing great t h i n g s . They do great t h i n g s because they are g r e a t , i f the great t h i n g s come a l o n g . But they are great j u s t the same when the great t h i n g s do not come a l o n g . I f I never d i d anything but s i t i n t h i s room and powder my f a c e and t e l l you what a c l e v e r f o o l you a r e , I should s t i l l be heavens h i g h above the m i l l i o n s of common women who do t h e i r domestic duty, and s a c r i f i c e them-s e l v e s , and run Trade Departments and a l l the r e s t of the v u l -g a r i t i e s . Has a l l the t e d i o u s p u b l i c work you have done made you any b e t t e r ? I have seen you before and a f t e r your boasted s t r o k e s of p o l i c y ; and you were the same man, and would have been the same ^ C h a r l o t t e Bronte, Jane E y r e , - f i r s t p u b l i s h e d 18^7, Penguin Books, London, 1953, p. 100. man t o me and t o y o u r s e l f i f you had n e v e r done them. Thank God my s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s i s some th ing n o b l e r t h a n v u l g a r c o n c e i t i n h a v i n g done., s o m e t h i n g . I t i s what I am, n o t what I d o , t h a t you must w o r s h i p i n me.^ -3. (Men. ) "The re was a t ime when t h e K i n g c o u l d depend upon t h e s u p -p o r t o f t h e a r i s t o c r a c y and t h e c u l t i v a t e d b o u r g e o i s i e . Today t h e r e i s n o t a s i n g l e a r i s t o c r a t l e f t i n p o l i t i c s , n o t a s i n g l e member o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n s , n o t a s i n g l e l e a d i n g personage i n b i g b u s i n e s s o r f i n a n c e . ' They a r e r i c h e r t h a n e v e r , more p o w e r f u l t h a n e v e r , more a b l e and b e t t e r educa t ed t h a n e v e r . But n o t one o f them w i l l t o u c h t h i s d r u d g e r y o f government , t h e p u b l i c work t h a t n e v e r ends because we cannot f i n i s h one j o b w i t h o u t c r e a t i n g t e n f r e s h o n e s . We ge t no t h a n k s f o r i t be -cause n i n e t y - n i n e h u n d r e d t h s o f i t i s unknown t o t h e p e o p l e , and t h e r e m a i n i n g h u n d r e d t h i s r e s e n t e d by them as an i n v a s i o n o f t h e i r l i b e r t y o r an i n c r e a s e i n t h e i r t a x a t i o n . I t wears ou t t h e s t r o n g e s t man and even t h e s t r o n g e s t woman, i n f i v e o r s i x y e a r s . I t s l o w s down t o n o t h i n g when we a re f r e s h f r o m our h o l i d a y s and bes t a b l e t o bear i t , and r i s e s i n an o v e r w h e l m i n g wave t h r o u g h some u n f o r e s e e n c a t a s t r o p h e when we a re on t h e v e r g e o f a n e r v o u s breakdown t h r o u g h o v e r w o r k and f i t f o r r e s t and s l e e p o n l y . . . . Our work i s no l o n g e r even r e s p e c t e d . I t k i s l o o k e d down on by our men o f g e n i u s as d i r t y w o r k . " ^ B e r n a r d Shaw, The A p p l e C a r t . C o n s t a b l e and C o . L t d . , L o n d o n , 1930, p . 50. L L . I b i d . , p . 3 ° . . 19^ h. God b l e s s a l l t h e p o l i c e m e n and f i g h t e r s o f c r i m e , May t h i e v e s go t o j a i l P o r a v e r y l o n g t i m e . T h e y ' v e had a h a r d day h e l p i n g c l e a n up t h e t o w n , now t h e y hang f r o m t h e man t l ep i ' e ce b o t h u p s i d e down. A g l a s s o f warm b l o o d and t h e n s t r a i g h t up t h e s t a i r s , Batman and R o b i n a r e s a y i n g t h e i r p r a y e r s . T h e y ' v e l o c k e d a l l t h e d o o r s and t h e y ' v e put out t h e b a t , Pu t on t h e i r bat jamas ( t hey l i k e d o i n g t h a t ) . T h e y ' v e f i l l e d t h e i r b a t w a t e r b o t t l e s , made t h e i r bat beds , w i t h two s p r i n g y m a t t r e s s e s f o r s l e e p y b a t h e a d s . T h e y ' r e c l o s i n g r e d eyes and t h e y ' r e c o u n t i n g b l a c k s h e e p . Batman and R o b i n a r e f a l l i n g a s l e e p . ^Roger Mcgough, "'Goodbat N i g h t m a n " , f r o m The L i v e r p o o l Scene ( e d . ) Edward L u c i e - S m i t h , D o u b l e d a y and C o . I n c . , Garden C i t y , New Y o r k , 1968, p . k6. 195 T e x t s o f P a s s a g e s Read i n O r a l R e a d i n g I I 1. (men) . EDWARD: Keep away. ( P a u s e ) . ( S l o w l y . ) I want t o speak t o t h a t man. I want t o have a word w i t h h i m . ( P a u s e . ) I t ' s q u i t e a b s u r d , o f c o u r s e . I r e a l l y c a n ' t t o l e r a t e some th ing so . . . a b s u r d , r i g h t on my d o o r s t e p . I s h a l l n o t t o l e r a t e i t . H e ' s s o l d n o t h i n g a l l m o r n i n g . No one p a s s e d . Y e s . A monk p a s s e d . A n o n - s m o k e r . I n a l o o s e ga rmen t . I t ' s q u i t e o b v i o u s he was a non-smoker but s t i l l , t h e man made no e f f o r t . He made no e f f o r t t o c l i n c h a s a l e , t o r i d h i m s e l f o f one o f h i s c u r s e d b o x e s . H i s one chance a l l m o r n i n g , and he made no e f f o r t . ( P a u s e . ) I h a v e n ' t was t ed my t i m e . I ' v e h i t , i n f a c t , upon t h e t r u t h . H e ' s n o t a m a t c h - s e l l e r a t a l l . The b a s t a r d i s n ' t a m a t c h -s e l l e r a t a l l . C u r i o u s I n e v e r r e a l i z e d t h a t b e f o r e . H e ' s an i m p o s t e r . I wa t ched h i m v e r y c l o s e l y . He made no move t o w a r d s t h e monk. As f o r t h e monk, t h e monk made no move t owards h i m . The monk was moving a l o n g t h e l a n e . He d i d n ' t p a u s e , o r h a l t , o r i n any way a l t e r h i s s t e p . As f o r t h e m a t c h - s e l l e r — how r i d i c u l o u s t o go on c a l l i n g h i m by t h a t t i t l e . What a f a r c e . N o , t h e r e i s some th ing v e r y f a l s e about t h a t man. I i n -t e n d t o ge t t o t h e bo t tom o f i t . I ' l l soon ge t r i d of h i m . He can go and p l y h i s t r a d e somewhere e l s e . I n -s t e a d of s t a n d i n g l i k e a b u l l o c k . . . a b u l l o c k , o u t s i d e my back g a t e . 1 . (Women.) ROSE: W e l l j you c a n ' t see me, can you? Y o u ' r e a b l i n d man. An o l d poor b l i n d man. A r e n ' t you? C a n ' t „see a d i c k e y b i r d . ( P a u s e . ) They say I know y o u . T h a t ' s an i n s u l t , f o r a s t a r t . Because I can t e l l y o u , I wouldn' t know you t o * s p i t o n , no t f r o m a m i l e o f f . ( P a u s e . ) O h , t h e s e c u s t o m e r s . They come i n he re and s t i n k t h e p l a c e o u t . A f t e r a h a n d o u t . I know a l l about i t . And as f o r y o u s a y i n g you know me, what l i b e r t y i s t h a t ? T e l l i n g my l a n d l o r d , t o o . U p s e t t i n g my l a n d l o r d . What do you t h i n k y o u ' r e up t o ? W e ' r e s e t t l e d down h e r e , c o s y , q u i e t , and our l a n d l o r d t h i n k s t h e w o r l d o f u s , w e ' r e h i s f a v o r i t e t e n a n t s , and you come i n and d r i v e h i m up the w a l l , and d r a g my name i n t o i t I What do you mean by d r a g g i n g my name i n t o i t , and my h u s b a n d ' s name? How d i d you know what our name was? ( P a u s e ) . Y o u ' v e l e d h i m a d a n c e , have y o u , t h i s week-end? Y o u ' v e got h i m g o i n g , have you? A p o o r , weak o l d man, who l e t s a r e s p e c t a b l e h o u s e . F i n i s h e d . Done f o r . Y o u push y o u r way i n and shove h i m a b o u t . And y o u d r a g my name i n t o i t . ( P a u s e . ) Come o n , t h e n . Y o u say y o u wanted t o see me. W e l l , I ' m h e r e . S p i t i t out o r out you g o . What do you want? 6 H a r o l d P i n t e r , A S l i g h t A c h e , f r o m Three P l a y s by H a r o l d P i n t e r , Grove P r e s s , I n c . , New Y o r k , 1961, p . 18. 7 ' H a r o l d P i n t e r , The Room, p u b l i s h e d w i t h The Dumb W a i t e r , Methuen and C o . L t d . , L o n d o n , i 9 6 0 , p . 29. 197 2. (Men. ) PROTEUS: My f r i e n d s , we came he re t o a meet ing . . We f i n d , a l a s I t h a t t h e mee t i ng i s t o be a l e a v e - t a k i n g . I t i s a sad l e a v e - t a k i n g on our p a r t , but a c o r d i a l o n e . (Hear H e a r , f r o m P l i n y ) . , We a re c a s t down but n o t d i s -c o u r a g e d . L o o k i n g back t o t h e p a s t w i t h r e g r e t , we c a n s t i l l l o o k f o r w a r d t o t h e f u t u r e w i t h h o p e . Tha t f u t u r e has i t s danger s and i t s d i f f i c u l t i e s . I t w i l l b r i n g us new p r o b l e m s ; and i t w i l l b r i n g us f a c e t o f a c e w i t h a new k i n g . But t h e new p rob lems and t h e new k i n g w i l l n o t make us f o r g e t our o l d c o u n s e l l o r , mona rch , and - he w i l l a l l o w me t o say - comrade . (Hear H e a r s ad l i b i t u m . ) I know my words w i l l f i n d an echo i n a l l y o u r h e a r t s when I c o n c l u d e by s a y i n g t h a t w h a t s o e v e r k i n g may r e i g n — o AMANDA: Y o u ' l l be V i c a r o f B r a y , -Joe. 2. (Women.) L Y S I S T R A T A : -Just s o ! B r e a k a g e s ! L i m i t e d ! -Just so.! L i s t e n t o me, s i r ; and judge w h e t h e r I have no t r e a s o n t o f e e l e v e r y t h i n g you h a v e . j u s t s a i d t o t h e v e r y marrow o f my bones . Here am I , t h e Power M i s t r e s s R o y a l . I have t o o r g a n i z e and a d m i n i s t e r a l l t h e motor power i n t h e c o u n t r y f o r t h e good o f t h e c o u n t r y . I have t o h a r n e s s t h e . w i n d s and t h e t i d e s , t h e o i l s and t h e c o a l seams. I have t o see t h a t e v e r y l i t t l e s ewing machine i n t h e H e b r i d e s , e v e r y d e n t i s t ' s d r i l l i n S h e t l a n d , o Shaw, o p . c i t . , p . 73. 198 e v e r y c a r p e t sweeper i n M a r g a t e , has i t s s t r e a m o f d r i v i n g power on t a p f r o m a s w i t c h i n the w a l l as p u n c t u a l l y as t h e g r e a t t h u n d e r i n g dynamos o f our b i g i n d u s t r i a l p l a n t s . I do i t ; but i t c o s t s t w i c e as much as I t s h o u l d . Why? Because e v e r y new i n v e n -t i o n i s bought up and s u p p r e s s e d by B r e a k a g e s , L i m i t e d . E v e r y b reakdown, e v e r y a c c i d e n t , e v e r y smash and c r a s h i s a j ob f o r t hem. But f o r them we s h o u l d have u n -b r e a k a b l e g l a s s , u n b r e a k a b l e s t e e l , i m p e r i s h a b l e m a t e r i a l s o f a l l s o r t s . But f o r them our goods t r a i n s c o u l d be s t a r t e d and s topped w i t h o u t b a t t e r i n g and t e a r i n g t h e v i t a l s out o f ' e v e r y wagon and s e n d i n g i t t o t h e r e p a i r shop once a week i n s t e a d of once a y e a r . Our n a t i o n a l r e p a i r b i l l r u n s up t o hundreds o f m i l l i o n s . I c o u l d name you a dozen i n v e n t i o n s w i t h i n my own t e r m o f o f f i c e w h i c h w o u l d have e f f e c t e d e n o r -mous economies i n b reakages and breakdown; but t h e s e p e o p l e can a f f o r d t o pay an i n v e n t o r more f o r h i s machine o r h i s p r o c e s s o r w h a t e v e r i t may be t h a n he c o u l d hope t o make by a l e g i t i m a t e use o f i t ; and when t h e y have bought i t t h e y smother i t . When t h e i n v e n t o r i s poor and n o t good a t d e f e n d i n g h i m s e l f t h e y make bogus t r i a l s o f h i s machine and r e p o r t t h a t i t i s no u s e . I have been shot a t t w i c e by i n v e n t o r s d r i v e n c r a z y by t h i s s o r t o f t h i n g ; t h e y blames me f o r i t -as i f I c o u l d s t a n d up a g a i n s t t h i s mons te r w i t h i t s m i l l i o n s and i t s newspapers and i t s f i n g e r s i n e v e r y p i e . I t i s h e a r t - b r e a k i n g . I l o v e my depa r tmen t : 199 I dream of no th ing but i t s e f f i c i e n c y : w i t h me i t comes before every pe r sona l t i e , every happiness tha t common women run a f t e r . I would g ive my r i g h t hand to see these people i n the bankruptcy court w i t h h a l f t h e i r business a b o l i s h e d and the other h a l f done i n p u b l i c workshops where p u b l i c l o s se s are not p r i v a t e 9 gains. 3. (Men) THE FOUR AGITATORS: As Ch inese , we went to Mukden, four men and one woman. THE YOUNG COMRADE: To make propaganda and support Chinese workers through the teach ings of the c l a s s i c s and the p ropagand i s t s , the ABC of Communism: to b r i ng t o the ignoran t i n s t r u c t i o n about t h e i r s i t u a t i o n ; to the oppressed, c l a s s - c o n s c i o u s n e s s ; and to the c l a s s -c o n s c i o u s , the exper ience of r e v o l u t i o n . THE CONTROL CHORUS: I t i s s p l e n d i d To take up the word as a weapon i n the c l a s s war To rouse the masses to the f i g h t i n a loud and r i n g -i n g vo ice To c rush the oppressors To f ree the oppressed. Hard and u s e f u l i s the sma l l d a i l y l abour The g r i m , p e r s i s t e n t t y i n g and spreading of the p a r t y ' s net 9Shaw, I b i d . , p . 50.. 200 F o r t h e c a p i t a l i s t s ' guns To speak Bu t c o n c e a l t h e s p e a k e r To w i n the v i c t o r y But c o n c e a l t h e v i c t o r To d i e Bu t h i d e t h e d e a t h . Who w o u l d n o t do much f o r fame But who -would do i t f o r s i l e n c e ^ Y e t t h e i m p o v e r i s h e d h o s t i n v i t e s Honour t o supper And out o f t h e t i n y and . tumble-down hut s t e p s i r r e s i s t i b l e G r e a t n e s s And Fame c a l l s i n v a i n On t h e d o e r s o f t h e g r e a t d e e d . S t e p f o r w a r d a moment Unknown ones w i t h h i d d e n f a c e s And r e c e i v e our t h a n k s I THE FOUR AGITATORS: We h e l p e d t h e C h i n e s e comrades i n the c i t y o f Mukden , and made propaganda among t h e w o r k e r s . We had no bread f o r t h e hungry but o n l y knowledge f o r t h e i g n o r a n t . T h e r e f o r e we spoke of t h e r o o t cause o f p o v e r t y , d i d no t a b o l i s h p o v e r t y , but spoke o f t h e a b o l i t i o n o f t h e r o o t c a u s e . 1 0 B e r t o l t B r e c h t , "The Measures T a k e n " , i n The Modern T h e a t r e , V o l . 6 , e d . by E r i c B e n t l e y , A n c h o r B o o k s , D o u b l e d a y and C o . , New Y o r k , I960, p . 262. 3 . (Women) "WIFE: - J u d i t h K l e i n s p e a k i n g . I s t h a t y o u , d o c t o r ? Good e v e n -i n g . I j u s t -wanted t o c a l l and say y o u ' l l have t o be l o o k i n g f o r a hew b r i d g e p a r t n e r . Y e s , I ' m g o i n g away. -N o , no t f o r v e r y l o n g , but n o t l e s s t h a n a c o u p l e o f w e e k s . I ' m g o i n g t o Amste rdam. - Y e s , t h e y say the s p r i n g i s l o v e l y t h e r e . - N o , f r i e n d s , i n t h e p l u r a l , u n b e l i e v a b l e as i t s o u n d s . - How can y o u p l a y b r i d g e now? But we h a v e n ' t p l a y e d f o r two w e e k s . C e r t a i n l y F r i t z had a c o l d t o o . When i t g e t s so c o l d b r i d g e i s i m p o s s i b l e , I s a i d so t o o . - Oh n o , d o c t o r , how c o u l d I ? - T h e k l a had t o accommodate he r m o t h e r . - I know. - How s h o u l d I suppose t h a t ? - N o , i t d i d n ' t r e a l l y come s u d d e n l y a t a l l , i t ' s j u s t t h a t I kep t p u t t i n g i t o f f , but now I must . . . . Y e s , w e ' l l have t o c a l l o f f our movie d a t e . Say h e l l o t o T h e k l a f o r me. P e r h a p s y o u ' l l c a l l h i m sometimes on Sundays? So l o n g t h e n . - W e l l , g l a d l y , o f c o u r s e . - G o o d - b y e . " - ^ B e r t o l t B r e c h t , "The -Jewish W i f e " , i n The -Jewish W i f e and  O t h e r S h o r t P l a y s by B e r t o l t B r e c h t , i n E n g l i s h V e r s i o n s by E r i c B e n t l e y , Grove P r e s s , I n c . , New Y o r k , 1965, p . 11. 202 Appendix E ACT ONE Down behind a back s t r e e t , a p r o t e c t e d c o r n e r . Enter STEVE, a young man f a i r l y t a l l and w e l l b u i l t . P l e a s a n t l y  and i n f o r m a l l y dressed w i t h care and t a s t e so that he i s " w i t h i t "  r a t h e r than "way o u t " . STEVE d o e s n ' t f u s s , he l e t s events f l o w round  h i m , but t h e r e i s something d e c i s i v e about h i s manner and he looks as  i f he w o u l d n ' t l e t people push him around much. STEVE b r i n g s onstage a drum, motor h o r n , t r i a n g l e , cymbals , e t c . , which he arranges on one s i d e of the s t a g e . He speaks as he works . STEVE: ( s t r i k i n g the t r i a n g l e ) . Pure and c l e a r , v e r y low harmonic content — p r a c t i c a l l y a pure t o n e . ( P o s s i b l y t r y i n g another i n s t r u m e n t . ) I l i k e p l a y i n g p e r c u s s i o n , i t ' s not d i f f i c u l t and i t ' s s a t i s f y i n g — (a l i t t l e amused at h i m s e l f ) — r e l e a s e s f r u s t r a t i o n s . I d o n ' t do i t p r o f e s s i o n a l l y , t h i s j o b ' s j u s t p a r t t i m e . I ' m not a m u s i c i a n but I do e f f e c t s here f o r the — ( g e s t u r i n g to a c t i n g a r e a ) . I ' m here — t o — w e l l to have a l o o k — I l i k e see ing how t h i n g s work , what l i f e ' s got to o f f e r , I wanted to see what there was to t h e a t r e s and a c t i n g . ( P o s s i b l y p l a y i n g as he  t a l k s . ) Everyone ' s vaguely i n t e r e s t e d i n the t h e a t r e , not many people know as much as they t h i n k they do. I was i n an e l e c t r o n i c s f i r m a f t e r I l e f t t r a i n i n g c o l l e g e — Page 11 203 made v a l v e s and cathode ray tubes . They had a s p e c i a l t r a i n i n g course so I know q u i t e a l o t about e l e c t r o n i c s . Now I 'm w i t h an accountant —. I l i k e f i g u r e s — They send me out to the d i f f e r e n t f i r m s and I go through the books and draw up p r e l i m i n a r y s ta tements . You get to know how a bus iness r e a l l y works when you go through the books ; the f i g u r e s mean something, they have something r e a l behind them. T h a t ' s what i n t e r e s t s me about t h e a t r e : i t ' s not r e a l . I mean a p l a y i s j u s t something tha t somebody has made up. And ye t — I d o n ' t know — i t ' s c u r i o u s — anyway t h a t ' s why*'"I'm h e r e , i t i n t e r e s t s me, I can s i t here and watch and p l a y . ( P o s s i b l y p l a y i n g . ) I enjoy p l a y i n g , oh y e s , i t ' s my way of r e l a x i n g , I l i k e i n s t r u m e n t s , the way t h e y ' r e made and the sounds they make. But what I l i k e most i s the way music reaches i n t o y o u . I j u s t want to reach people I want t o make them f e e l , and w i t h music somehow . . . music communicates, i t reaches i n t o people and they can f o r g e t t h e i r b r a i n s , t h e i r i n t e l l e c t s and the way t h e y ' v e been taught to i n t e l l e c t u a l i z e about e v e r y t h i n g , they can j u s t l e t music happen, l e t i t happen p h y s i c a l l y to them. (He  p l a y s a l i t t l e . ) Mmm... (Enter DEAN, a young American dressed w i t h a l i t t l e more  more f o r m a l i t y than STEVE but w i t h an a i r of expensive  r e l a x a t i o n , p o s s i b l y he wears d a r k - r i m m e d ' s p e c t a c l e s .  A g o o d - l o o k i n g , i n t e l l i g e n t and-sens l t - ive man.) DEAN: As you go down the main road t h e r e ' s a s i d e s t r e e t r u n n i n g o f f — you see them a l l over London - - the houses are s m a l l , two or three Page 12 20*+ PATTY: FAK: STEVE: PATTY: CONE: FAK: s t o r e y s h i g h w i t h d i r t y b i t s of net c u r t a i n i n the windows . . . why d i r t y ? . . . Why d o n ' t they wash them? . . . Who's " t h e y " ? . . . T h e r e ' s a l i t t l e newsagent on one corner and an empty shop boarded up on another — why empty? Why boarded up? As you pass you can f e e l a k i n d of dampness, T h e r e ' s an o l d woman l o o k i n g at you from behind some of those net c u r t a i n s : you can f e e l her eyes f o l l o w i n g you as you walk on — not q u i t e s t a b b i n g you i n . t h e back but k i n d of d a r i n g y o u . Hal f -way down the s t r e e t t h e r e ' s an a l l e y w a y : t h e r e ' s ashcans at the entrance and at the bottom the a l l e y seems to t u r n . . . why not o l d woman? ••— I t ' s a f r e e c o u n t r y ! You walk down the a l l e y and you wonder what goes on round the corner . . . (Enter PATTY, 17 years , o l d , a p r e t t y l i t t l e cockney g i r l  w i t h a l o t of make-up round her eyes . She, i s l o o k i n g  at a home permanent wave o u t f i t . Enter FAK, about 18  years o l d , b u i l t l o o s e and b i g , dressed i n r e a l f l a s h  c l o t h e s . He c a r r i e s a box which he se t s down. Enter  CONE, a l i t t l e o l d e r than the o ther two , c a r e l e s s of h i s c l o t h e s \ but they are e s s e n t i a l l y sharp and he looks  t h i n , s m a l l and tough. ) ( to the a u d i e n c e ) . Have a good l o o k . Y o u ' l l know me next t i m e . ( b r i n g i n g out a gun which he p o i n t s at STEVE). Bang! Bang! Bet that g i v e you a t u r n . They got me. You l o o k a f t e r your drum. ( s t o p p i n g the others w i t h a g e s t u r e ) . Hey! (He l i s t e n s . ) Hear anything? Page 13 205 CONE: Thought I ... ( S i g n a l l i n g FAK t o c a r r y on.) No. FAK: Wotcher! Bang bang! F i r e w o r k s . Ten bob a box. CONE: Genuine a t o m i c d y n a m i t e . FAK: Cor what a b l a s t . Bang bang. CONE: Hydrogen! P l u t o n i u m ! Uranium! You won't g e t them i n no emporium. PATTY: ( c o u n t i n g c u r l e r s i n h e r home perm o u t f i t ) . One, two, t h r e e , f o u r , f i v e , s i x ... s i x s m a l l ones. One, two, t h r e e , f o u r , f i v e , s i x , s e v e n , e i g h t , n i n e , t e n , e l e v e n , twelve/' . . . •' ' ' '••. '.' •] i-Mind you don't h u r t y o u r s e l v e s . FAK: ( t o a u d i e n c e ) S u r p r i s e p a c k e t . CONE: M y s t e r y bunch o f b i g t r o u b l e . FAK: S i x bob a box. CONE: F i v e bob. FAK: Four bob. CONE: No f o o l i n g , no k i d d i n g . Look what y o u ' r e g e t t i n g f o r yo u r money.- (FAK and CONE open t h e box.) FAK; Aw s h u t up. PATTY: T h i r t e e n , f o u r t e e n , f i f t e e n ... CONE: What! FAK: No! CONE: U n r e p e a t a b l e ! FAK: U n b e l i e v a b l e ! CONE: S t i c k i t up a c a r e x h a u s t . FAK: R i p o f f t h e s i l e n c e r . CONE: B u r s t a t y r e i f y o u ' r e l u c k y . FAK: Two and a t a n n e r at W o o l i e ' s . CONE: At o m i c cannon! ... And s i x k i n g - s i z e C h i n e s e c r a c k e r s — r e a l f i r e — p l e n t y b i g bang! Page 14 206 FAK: Just the job f o r a bow wow's wagger. Wham! Whack! Clack! Splam! CONE: Packet of s p a r k l e r s : l e t the k i d d i e s b l i n d each other! Did I say four s h i l l i n g s ? I don't ask four bob — FAK: I don't ask three and a k i c k --CONE: I don't ask three s h i l l i n g s — FAK: Two and a tanner! CONE: Half a d o l l a r ! Reach the moon on a J e t Morgan sky rocke t . PATTY: There should be another b i g one, have I been done? CONE: Hey! (He l i s t e n s , motions FAK to look o u t s i d e , FAK does so.) FAK: No. PATTY: Are you l i s t e n i n g f o r something? CONE: Please to remember the f i f t h of November. (CONE sees something i n s i d e the box.) Whow! PATTY: I n s t r u c t i o n s read c a r e f u l l y . CONE: (throwing the f i r e w o r k to FAK). Lamp t h a t . PATTY: Fi r m l y wind strand to root of h a i r ... FAK: There's gunpowder here. PATTY: Thoroughly moisten w i t h cotton wool dipped i n wave l o t i o n . . . FAK: This'11 give us a g i g g l e . PATTY: I t must be st r o n g , i t don't h a l f pong. FAK: And uncle was going to r a f f l e i t . ... Here, catch! CONE: Catch! FAK: Catch! PATTY: Do you mind, I'm t r y i n g to read. CONE: She's reading! Ah hah! What you doing, Patty? FAK: What you doing, Patty? Page 15 207 CONE: What you d o i n g , P a t t y ? PATTY: Aw s h u t up. CONE: She's r e a d i n g . FAK: What'11 G r e t a say t o t h i s , eh? What'11 she say t o t h i s ? PATTY: ( i r r i t a t e d ) . Aw G r e t a ! FAK: ( t e a s i n g her)",' Aw G r e t a ! G r e t a ! G r e t a ! PATTY: Aw G r e t a ! G r e t a ! G r e t a ! G r e t a ! (CONE l a u g h s and goes and '. l o o k s o u t s i d e . ) PATTY: What you got there,? ... W e l l ? FAK: Something'11 t a k e t h e c u r l out o f y o u r h a i r . PATTY: Where'd you n i c k i t ? FAK: Hah hah. PATTY: Bet t h e r e wasn't a copper : f o r m i l e s . FAK: C o u l d n ' t b l o o d y m a t t e r . PATTY: Blow up Buckingham P a l a c e ! Oh no. Migh t u p s e t G r e t a . FAK: Aw s h u t up. PATTY: Bet y ou bought i t . FAK: What? PATTY: Bought i t I b e t c h e r . FAK: Wet, she sa y s we're wet. CONE: N o t h i n g d o i n g , P a t t y ? FAK: S l a c k A l i c e ? PATTY: Look t o y o u r s e l f , Faky-boy CONE: Look t o y o u r s e l f , Faky-boy FAK: Look t o y o u r s e l f , Faky-boy CONE: Seen you somewhere. FAK: Somewhere b e f o r e . PATTY: B i g a c t . CONE: Sw e e t i e p e e t i e P a t t y - p a w s . B e a t ! B e a t ! FAK: Going my way? PATTY: C a t c h me — CONE: C a t c h me. Page 16 208 FAK: C a t c h me. CONE: C a t c h me, P a t t y - p a w s , who'd e v e r have t h o u g h t ? PATTY: Oh, g i v e o v e r . CONE: G i v e o v e r . FAK: G i v e o v e r . PATTY: G i v e o v e r . G i v e o v e r . CONE: G i v e o v e r , s w e e t h e a r t . FAK: Lovey dovey, n i g h t n i g h t . PATTY: Leave me be, I n e v e r ! CONE: She n e v e r . FAK: She n e v e r e v e r . CONE: She n e v e r e v e r what? FAK: What d i d she n e v e r e v e r ? CONE: She n e v e r e v e r been w i t h nobody — what, nobody? No! No! No! Nobody. PATTY: Stop i t ! Stop i t ! CONE & I f you see a b i g f a t woman. FAK: S t a n d i n g on a c o r n e r humming. That's f a t J e s s i e . PATTY: I s t h a t s o . CONE & I f you see h e r i n t h e p i c t u r e s FAK: W i t h a bag o f d o l l y m i x t u r e s T h a t ' s f a t J e s s i e . PATTY: I s t h a t s o. CONE & I f you see h e r i n a shop. FAK: Sobbing on a g r e a t b i g mop. Tha t ' s f a t J e s s i e . FAK: ( b r i n g i n g o u t ' h i s , g u n ) . Yah! (PATTY screams.) FAK: Always s c a r e s b i r d s . CONE: Shut up. ( L i s t e n i n g . ) PATTY: What ? CONE: Be q u i e t . Page 17 209 PATTY: You e x p e c t i n g someone? . . . Who? . . . Who! Who! CONE: . Shut up . . . Where d'y°ii nobble i t ? FAK: My Dad. He knocked i t o f f a J e r r y depot i n the war . Got a l o v e l y axe but he had to chuck i t away. P l e n t y of ammo t o o . PATTY: You want to be c a r e f u l . FAK: K i l l a f e l l e r easy . PATTY Put i t away, you soppy t h i n g . Y o u ' r e t a l k i n g s i l l y . FAK: Don ' t you l i p me! Don ' t you l i p me l i k e t h a t ! PATTY: Y o u ' l l get hung. FAK: T h a t ' s f o r s t u p i d f e l l e r s . T h a t ' s f o r s t u p i d f e l l e r s . CONE: Relax . . . Hands i s q u i e t e r . . . see . . . t h e r e ' s a spot there — j u s t there (CONE demonstrates on the base of FAK's s k u l l ) and you h i t — s o . FAK: Here go easy . . . . There? CONE: Jus t t h e r e . FAK: There. CONE: S t i c k to" the gum, chum. T h i s r e q u i r e s f i n e s s e . . . . B e t t e r keep i t from — she d o n ' t l i k e raw g a t s . FAK: ( u n c e r t a i n ) . Oh, I dunno, I dunno. (PATTY laughs and t a k i n g some n a i l v a r n i s h from her handbag s t a r t s to p a i n t her n a i l s . ) PATTY: Was I w i t h you l o t F r i d a y week? FAK: Went to the f l i c k s . PATTY: F r i d a y be fore t h a t . CONE: Went to the dogs. FAK: T h a t ' s r i g h t . There was a s h e l l - o u t and us and some of the f e l l e r s went to the dogs. PATTY: Ah . . . t h a t ' s when Maureen d i d my h a i r . CONE: How d ' y o u keep your n a i l s so long? Page 18 210 FAK: She never washes up. PATTY: Don ' t be d a f t . FAK: N i c e s m e l l . CONE: Give me t h a t . I ' l l do i t a s i g h t b e t t e r than y o u . (To FAK i n d i c a t i n g the e x i t ) Keep y o u r s e l f awake. (CONE p a i n t s PATTY's n a i l s . ) CONE: ( w h i s t l i n g through h i s t e e t h ) . Bang bang bang and b i s h b i s h b i s h Bang bang bang and cosh cosh cosh A l d g a t e pump i t a i n ' t what i t used to be Poor o l d A l d g a t e pump. 0! PATTY: I never seen tha t b lond f e l l e r s i n c e . FAK: What f e l l e r ? PATTY: S ince we went t o the p i c t u r e s w i t h him — you know, the t a l l f e l l e r , b l o n d and q u i t e good l o o k i n g r e a l l y . . . What happened to him? CONE: What happened t o who? PATTY: The f e l l e r I was s i t t i n g by . . . what was h i s name? CONE: D i d n ' t go w i t h no one e l s e . PATTY: Are you p o t t y ? He sat between me and y o u : Fak then me then him then — G a r r y — G a r r y , urn, Garry . . . CONE: ( j a b b i n g her hand) . Shut up . PATTY: Oo! Mind my n a i l s . That h u r t . . . . My Ma'd s l a y me i f she caught me w i t h t h i s on! FAK: Go o n , bet you beat h e r . PATTY: Could be. FAK: What's s t o p p i n g you going o f f on your own? PATTY: Oh . . . FAK: Scared? PATTY: What me? — I w o u l d n ' t l i k e to l i v e on myiown, t h a t ' s a l l . Page 19 211 FAK: Why l i v e on y o u r own? PATTY: Eh? CONE: A r e you n o t t h e f l i p p i n g v i r g i n . PATTY: You keep y o u r gob s t r a i g h t . ... I c o u l d n ' t , I c a n ' t , ... I ' l l n o t be a n o t h e r C o n n i e . CONE: Eh? ... D i d you l e a k ? FAK: Y e s , I t o l d h e r and I t o l d h e r t o keep h e r mouth s h u t . PATTY: I h a v e n ' t t o l d anybody. CONE: Get t h i s : I t won't be me t h a t ' l l be a t you i f you do. PATTY: I've s a i d I ha v e n ' t t o l d anybody, h a v e n ' t I ? FAK: And don't you n e i t h e r . PATTY: I h a v e n ' t . CONE: Keep s t i l l ... j u s t remember: i t won't be me. PATTY: ... Any day, any t i m e o f day, any n i g h t ... i n t h e s t r e e t s , o r t h e f l i c k s o r an e s p r e s s o ... (CONE l a u g h s g e n t l y . ) FAK: Bet I can h i t t h a t h a r d e r t h a n you. Bet I can h i t i t so i t f a l l s down. PATTY: Y o u ' l l b r e a k y o u r f i s t . FAK: Bet I can h i t so — CONE: Q u i e t ! PATTY: What you l i s t e n i n g f o r ? CONE: Shut up! ( L i s t e n i n g . ) PATTY: What! What's happened? Has some t h i n g happened? CONE: Aw s i t down and keep s t i l l . I haven't f i n i s h e d y e t . PATTY: W e l l has i t ? CONE: Has what? PATTY: I don't know. CONE W e l l , what you f l a p p i n g about? FAK: ( h i t t i n g t h e w a l l ) . They're y e l l e r ! They're y e l l e r ! Page 20 212 Ha ha! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! PATTY: Aw s h u t up. FAK: Bang! Bang! CONE: You keep o v e r t h e r e . ( I n d i c a t i n g t h e e x i t . ) FAK: Why don't you t a k e a t u r n ? CONE: I'm busy. PATTY: T e l l us about h e r and Ronny. FAK" I t o l d y o u t h a t . PATTY: T e l l me a g a i n . CONE: F o r c r y i n g out l o u d . FAK: She had i t i n f o r Ronny so he h i d h i m s e l f and she l e t him. But she knew where he was and he knew she knew. CONE: ( l y r i c a l s a r c a s t i c ) . And she knew he knew she knew. FAK: And he knew i f he s t e p p e d out he'd get t r o d on. PATTY: And he had t o , d i d n ' t he? He j u s t had t o . He got a l l s o r t o f e x c i t e d and dreamy o f t h e t h o u g h t o f i t and he c o u l d n ' t s t o p h i m s e l f . He had t o — come o u t . ... And she saw t o i t . She f i x e d i t . I b e t i t g i v e y ou k i c k s . I b e t he had k i c k s i n t h e r e j u s t w a i t i n g and dreaming. I b e t he got a l l worked .up.__. . ..  (CONE l a u g h s q u i e t l y . ) I w i s h I was — I w i s h I was G r e t a . G r e t a ! ... L i k e s p i t on a h o t p l a t e t h a t ' s h e r . R a z z l e d a z z l e . I t ' s l i k e — i t ' s l i k e she h i t s 'em and heps 'em. Anyone ' 11 do a n y t h i n g f o r h e r . S h e ' l l have S o l l y c a p e r down B l a c k p o o l p i e r w i t h no c l o t h e s on and b a s h a copper w i t h a P e p s i - C o l a b o t t l e . I t ' s l i k e she makes s o m e t h i n g come b u s t i n g o u t . Everyone's got s o m e t h i n g i n s i d e and she makes i t grow and grow and come Page 21 2*3 b u s t i n g o u t . She l o o k s a t S o l l y . S o l l y f i g h t s Bobby and f i r s t t h i n g t h e y know t h e y ' r e down t h e end o f t h e s t r e e t f i g h t i n g anyone t h e y s e e . And she p i c k s them up and c hucks them round h e r head and t h a t f o u r i s f i g h t i n g e i g h t and t h e e i g h t ' s f i g h t i n g s i x t e e n : t h e whole s t r e e t ' s f i g h t i n g . I t ' l l s t a r t w i t h one f i g h t and t h e n t h e whole s t r e e t — a l l e x p l o d i n g and g r o w i n g and e x p l o d i n g , and e v e r y b i t o f e v e r y e x p l o s i o n makes e v e r y t h i n g r ound i t e x p l o d e . The whole s t r e e t ' s f i g h t i n g — t h e whole b l o c k — t h e whole c o u n t r y — t h e s e a — t h e a i r — a l l t h e p l a n e t s . And she s t a n d s t h e r e , h e r eyes g l i t t e r i n g and s p a r k l i n g and l a u g h i n g t h e whole t i m e . B e a r i n g i t . B e a r i n g i t . CONE: ( p a i n t i n g h i s f i n g e r - n a i l ) . Cute a i n ' t i t . PATTY: 0! L e t ' s go somewhere. Get s o m e t h i n g s t a r t e d . ... I t ' s Guy Fawkes. I t ' s Guy Fawkes. ... I n e v e r been on a b a s h . I want — I want t o know! I t ' s Guy Fawkes. ... You'd do i t f o r h e r . ... I s i t ... i s i t ... h e r ... eh? FAK: S o r t o f . PATTY: Ha ha h e r ! Her! FAK: Aw s h u t up. PATTY: Ha ha! A game eh? What a j o k e . Oh men! Oh men l i k e b e i n g f o o l e d . You men! You men" Men! Ha ha! You men a r e i n f o r a hoke you a r e ! A s u r p r i s e ! A s u r p r i s e ! FAK: Eh? PATTY: T e l l me, Faky — why y o u l i k e eh? CONE: Who s a y s he l i k e s h e r ? PATTY: She sends you d o e s n ' t she? She r e a l l y sends you. Page 22 2\h FAK: Aw s h u t up. PATTY: You'd do a n y t h i n g f o r h e r — a n y t h i n g . FAK: Shut up! Shut up! CONE: Hark, l o u s e . I l o v e you. FAK: Shut up! PATTY: Shut up s h u t up s a y s F a k y - w h i t e - w i t h - f e a r . FAK: I'm n o t a f r a i d o f h e r . CONE: You're j e a l o u s . PATTY: J e a l o u s ! J e a l o u s ! Me! You're a l l — no minds o f y o u r own. Men! My s t a r s ! J e a l o u s ! And she's n o t even c l e a n . Men! And she has t h e l o t o f you — t h e l o t — Harrow Road — t h e l o t ! And a l l f o r someone who's — f o r a woman who's — CONE: Sweet f e m i n i n e b i t c h . PATTY: You s a i d ... you s a i d ... y o u s a i d — she's n o t n i c e . FAK: What! PATTY: You d i d . FAK: I d i d n ' t . CONE: She a i n ' t n i c e . FAK: She i s . PATTY: You say she i s n ' t . CONE: Spare me. PATTY: And I don't u n d e r s t a n d you and I n e v e r w i l l . You. You and a l l t h e o t h e r s ! A l l t h e o t h e r s ! What about them? FAK: What? PATTY: What about them. What about them. CONE: What about them? PATTY: The gang. The gang. CONE: (m o c k i n g ) . The gang! The gang! PATTY: The gang! The gang! The gang she r u n s ! She Page 23 215 r u n s t h e p r o t e c t i o n ! Pay up o r squeeze! Break y o u r windows b r e a k y o u r bones! Pay up o r scream! CONE: Shut up. PATTY: Aw! G r e t a ' 1 1 h e a r ! G r e t a ! G r e t a ! G r e t a ! And t h e j o k e — t h e j o k e ! Ha ha ! Hop! Hop! But y o u ' l l soon see! Y o u ' l l s e e ! ... CONE: Q u i e t . L i s t e n . ( T r y i n g t o h e a r s o m e t h i n g o u t s i d e . ) PATTY: Changing i s n ' t she? Changing! CONE: ( t o FAK). Stop h e r . C l o u t h e r . PATTY: L i s t e n i n g f o r G r e t a ? L o o k i n g f o r G r e a t , eh? Why's she n o t h e r e , eh? Changed! She's d i f f e r e n t ! And i t ' s g o i n g t o get worse. Worse. Bah! Mummy's boy M a s t e r Coney! Doesn't l o v e h i m any more! She! She! She's l o s i n g i n t e r e s t and e s p e c i a l l y i n M a s t e r Coney! (CONE t u r n s on h e r . ) • •• I ••• X ••• FAK: ( i n a r t i c u l a t e , t r y i n g t o d i s t r a c t CONE). Ah. CONE: Eh? FAK: ... D o l l y . CONE: D o l l y ? FAK: D o l l y ! CONE: D o l l y ? FAK: D o l l y . (CONE t u r n s t o PATTY a g a i n . FAK goes t o h e r o t h e r s i d e and by h i s d e s p e r a t i o n draws CONE's a t t e n t i o n beyond h e r . ) D o l l y ! D o l l y ! CONE: D o l l y ? FAK: D o l l y ! CONE: D o l l y ! FAK: D o l l y . Page 24 216 CONE: FAK: FAK: CONE: FAK: CONE: FAK: PATTY: FAK: PATTY: FAK: PATTY: CONE: PATTY: DEAN: PATTY: FAK: CONE: PATTY: FAK: CONE: PATTY: FAK: CONE: FAK: PATTY: Dolly. Dolly. (CONE and FAK have hypnotized each other. PATTY tries to get away and in so doing draws them on to her.)  (at PATTY). Dolly. (at PATTY). Dolly. Dolly. Dolly. Dolly. Shoo. Shoo. Shoo. Shoo. Shoo. Shoo. Shoo. Shoo. Shoo. (PATTY screams.) (to audience as i f drowning). Help! Help me! Help! Stop ... (He walks into their midst.) ... What goes on here? Eh? Them ... One of them. He's alone ... (walking up to DEAN) Nice, isn't he? (they begin to amble round DEAN). Nice — Cecil Gee — Careful not to crush — Pardon. Excuse me. He don't look very well — Bit daft, ain't he? Hi Mister! Page 25 217 FAK: DEAN: PATTY: FAK: CONE: PATTY: FAK: DEAN: CONE: FAK: DEAN: CONE: DEAN: PATTY: CONE: FAK: PATTY: CONE: DEAN: FAK: PATTY: FAK: PATTY: DEAN: FAK: CONE: FAK: Can you h e a r ? (amazed). Hey. He's l o o s e . He's l o o n y . Quack! Quack! P o t t y ! Look! What! Mmm ... pooch! Boo! A n i m a l s — Boo! Boo! — L i k e s tampeding — Bim! Bam! Bang! Bang! ( b r i n g i n g out h i s g u n ) . Yak! Yak! Yak! Yak! Boo boo boo boo. Yak! Yak! C o n t r o l . C o n t r o l Yak yak yak yak! Tcha! Tcha! Tcha! Yay yak yak yak! Tcha t c h a t c h a t c h a ! (making a g r e a t e f f o r t l t o c o l l e c t h i m s e l f and dominate  them.) What a r e you t r y i n g t o do? (CONE b e h i n d DEAN g i v e s h i m a sh a r p b l o w a t t h e base o f t h e s k u l l — unseen by t h e o t h e r s . ) Ah! (DEAN c o l l a p s e s f o r w a r d a g a i n s t FAK who i s s e n t  s t a g g e r i n g away f i r i n g h i s gun w i l d l y . DEAN f a l l s  and i s s t i l l . ) One o' them! One o' them! One o' them! St o p . ... Dead ... he's dead ... S h e ' l l maim me Page 26 I 218 f o r t h i s . S h e ' l l k i l l me . . . CONE: Shut u p , s l o b . FAK: I t a i n ' t y o u . I t a i n ' t y o u . I t ' s me. I t ' s me s h e ' l l be a f t e r . She s a i d n o t , not f o r a b i t , not a f t e r A l d g a t e . . . A l d g a t e . . . Leave i t . Come on . L e t ' s l e a v e i t . Someone'11 t a k e . i t away — perhaps i t ' l l d i sappear — perhaps i t ' l l m e l t . Come on . L e t ' s go. Where'11 we go? L e t ' s go to the f l i c k s . Come o n , P a t t y . L e t ' s go. CONE: Wake u p , s t u p i d . FAK: (weeping) . I t a i n ' t y o u . I t a i n ' t y o u . CONE: 0 b lubber shut up. FAK: I t a i n ' t y o u . I t a i n ' t y o u . CONE: Oh — ( d i s m i s s i n g i t ) . Oh — I ' l l t h i n k of something. FAK: What? . . . Waht? You — you — y e s , you w i l l . T h a t ' s i t , h e ' l l t h i n k of something. Y e s , you w i l l , you w i l l , you w i l l , oh w e l l . T h a t ' s w e l l . T h a t ' l l be a l l r i g h t . T h a t ' l l be a l l r i g h t . CONE: Yeah. (Relaxed and drowsy he p i c k s up the gun and l a u g h s . ) FAK: What you l a u g h i n g f o r ? CONE: He looks a t r e a t . FAK: A t r e a t . . . A t r e a t . . . a f a i r t r e a t . . . I f e e l good . . . I f e e l b loody good . . . I f e e l bloody wonder f u l . PATTY: (weeping and l a u g h i n g ) . Mucker! . . . Mucker! . . . Stuck up! . . . T h a t ' s f o r y o u , mucker. You. You . I hate y o u ! CONE: There ' s something about t h i s b loke . . . something about the way he l o o k s , he d o n ' t look . . . Wonder i f h e ' s got a gun. (CONE f i n d s some American c i g a r e t t e s i n DEAN's p o c k e t . ) Page 27 219 Yank . . . Is he a yank? . . . L e t ' s get t h i s l o t s h i f t e d be fore someone stumbles over i t . FAK: They got no Yanks. CONE: Eh? FAK: They got no Yanks! CONE: For c r y i n g out l o u d get l i f t i n g . FAK: Y o u ' l l t h i n k of something. CONE: Yeah. PATTY: I f e e l s i c k . FAK: Not bad. Not bad eh? . . . K i l l e r ! . . . K i l l e r ! . . . Oh! I ' m gonna get a w h i s t l e s l e e k e r than t h i s and l o n g e r . . . new d r a i n s — narrow, narrow and dark . . . and a new s h i r t . . . Oh! White ! Wi th French c u f f s . And a new t i e — and I ' l l knot i t broad . . . I ' m gonna get a c i g a r e t t e -h o l d e r , t h i c k and s tubby. Bamboo w i t h a g o l d band. I 'm gonna get me a great red ruby! R i c h and b u l g i n g and b o l d l i k e b l o o d . Sweet t h i c k p l e a s u r e i s g u t t e r i n g through me. Red! Red! Red! '11 make me f e e l good. CHORUS: K i l l e r ! K i l l e r ! K i l l e r ! K i l l e r ! K i l l e r ! K i l l e r ! FAK: Carry i t dressy on a t h i c k gold r i n g ; S o l i d and stubby and s t r o n g and t h i c k . F l a s h 'em i n the l o o k e r and stab and s t i n g Send them s o l i d and c l u t c h i n the mick . CHORUS:. K i l l e r ! K i l l e r ! K i l l e r ! K i l l e r ! K i l l e r ! K i l l e r ! FAK: Sweet o l d , l o v e l y o l d , s o l i d g o l d ruby — Deep, sweet, b l o o d warm, sombre and s o f t . Great sweet p l e a s u r e i s w e l l i n g a l l through me — Loose and easy and warm and f r e e . Page 28 220 (They a r e i n a s t a t e o f e u p h o r i a o r p o s t e c s t a s y ,  t h e i r minds and n e r v o u s s y s t e m u n s l u n g . STEVE has h e l p e d  l u l l them t o t h i s . STEVE s t r i k e s a n o t e . DEAN g e t s up  and c o n s i d e r s CONE, FAK and PATTY.) What i s t h i s ? What i s t h i s ? I don't g e t i t ... I l i k e t o u n d e r s t a n d t h i n g s and I don't u n d e r s t a n d t h i s ... I t ' s l i k e some n a s t y j o k e ... I t ' s l i k e s p i t t i n g i n y o u r eye ... k i n d o f n a s t y and weak and dangerous ... I f I t u r n my back on t h i s i t ' l l r o t i n s i d e me ... O.K. f e l l e r s , t h i s t i m e you won't get me so f a s t o r so e a s y , w e ' l l w a i t u n t i l t h e moment I choose and t h e n w e ' l l see who bops who ... (DEAN resumes h i s c o r p s e p o s t u r e but chooses a d i f f e r e n t  p a r t o f t h e s t a g e t o l i e down. At a s i g n f r o m DEAN, STEVE  s t r i k e s a n o t e and wakes t h e o t h e r s . ) Ah! Hah! Eh? what's up w i t h you? ( s h e e p i s h ) . Oh — s o r r y ? What you mean s o r r y ? Thought i t was them. Thought I h e a r d s o m e t h i n g . N i t . M i g h t ' v e been them, c o u l d ' v e been. I f you'd h e a r d them. Yeah, i f I'd h e a r d . I f . Where'd you t h i n k G r e t a ' s got t o ? (Pause.) Greta'11 be a l o n g . I know s h e ' l l be a l o n g . (Pause.) S h e ' l l be a l o n g . Page 29 221 CONE: She s a i d she'd be h e r e . FAK: W e l l ... (Pause.) Here! Where's i t gone? Someone's p i n c h e d i t ... You've p u t i t somewhere. PATTY: What's t h e m a t t e r ? FAK: I t was h e r e I swear. Oh Gawd! PATTY: I t ' s t h e r e . FAK: How'd i t g e t t h e r e ? ( T u r n i n g on CONE.) V e r y f u n n y , v e r y funny I'm s u r e . Hah hah. CONE: Look o u t ! Get t h a t . ( E n t e r DODO. A p p a r e n t l y about 16 y e a r s o l d w i t h a  p l a i n , p a l e , o l d f a c e . \ She might even.be an o l d woman.  She wears a man's o v e r c o a t t o o l a r g e f o r h e r and a b i g , o l d h a t . She b r i n g s on a huge p i l e o f r a g s , newspapers  e t c . , c a r r y i n g them, d r a g g i n g them on a m a k e s h i f t s l e d g e  o r p u s h i n g them i n a pram. She doe s n ' t see t h e o t h e r s but she sees t h e a u d i e n c e and i s s t a r t l e d and s u s p i c i o u s . E v e n t u a l l y she d e c i d e s t h e b e s t way t o get round them i s t o t r y and amuse them. She p e r f o r m s any t r i c k s she may  know of t h e s i m p l e s t , c l u m s i e s t k i n d , making shapes  w i t h h e r e f i n g e r s r e s e m b l i n g a n i m a l s etc.', p r e s e n t l y she b e g i n s t o make n o i s e s : c l u c k i n g , g r u n t i n g e t c . , a g a i n  i m i t a t i n g a n i m a l s , f i n a l l y she i s a t h e r ease . PATTY  g e t s t h e g i g g l e s . ) PATTY: I w i s h Maureen c o u l d see t h i s . CONE: Take y o u r t i p from me. (To DODO) H i y a banana f a c e ! What's y o u r name?. (DODO f r e e z e s w i t h f e a r . ) DODO: ( i n a r t i c u l a t e ) . Do ... do ... do ... CONE: Dodo eh? H i y a h Dodo. FAK: H e l l o , Dodo. CONE: G l a d we seen you. Page 30 222 PATTY: Ever so g l a d . FAK: Ever so g l a d , eh? CONE: Because we've got a l i t t l e p r e s e n t f o r you. FAK: A p r e s e n t ? CONE: F o r h e r b i r t h d a y . FAK: Her b i r t h d a y ? PATTY: Her b i r t h d a y . CONE: A b i r t h d a y p r e s e n t f o r h e r b i r t h d a y . L e t ' s show. L e t ' s show h e r t h e p r e s e n t . (CONE m o t i o n s them t o f e t c h t h e "body".) PATTY: Yes! Yes! FAK: Yeah! What'd you guess i t was, Dodo? What'd you guess? PATTY: Guess. FAK: Guess. CONE: Guess. PATTY: Guess. Guess. CONE: Say- s o m e t h i n g , Dodo. C l o s e y o u r eyes and s a y what comes i n t o y o u r e y e s . T h i n k ! Long and t h i n — FAK: Heavy. CONE: Yeah. Long and t h i n and heavy ... eh, Dodo?', PATTY: Yes. FAK: Long and t h i n and heavy. CONE: What i s i t ? What i s i t , eh? PATTY: Long and t h i n and heavy. FAK: Long and t h i n and heavy. CONE: Long and t h i n and heavy — l i k e a — ? PATTY: I t ' s l i k e a — FAK: L i k e a — (Touches DODO). DODO: C a r p e t ! FAK: A c a r p e t ! CONE A c a r p e t ! ... A c a r p e t ... Who s a i d t h i s g i r l was s t u p i d , eh? ... Who s a i d she was d u l l ... Page 31 223 A c a r p e t . My! What a b r a i n ... A c a r p e t ... That ' s r i g h t , Dodo. Tha t ' s a b s o l u t e l y r i g h t . C l e v e r g i r l . W e l l done. A l l r i g h t . Show t h e l a d y h e r c a r p e t . Look, Dodo! ' Here's y o u r c a r p e t . Smashing. P e r s i a n . FAK: A c a r p e t . CONE: Fak y-boy. Show t h e l a d y h e r c a r p e t . FAK: What? CONE: (miming). You t a k e t h a t . And you t a k e t h a t . PATTY: T h i s , eh? FAK: What? PATTY: That! That! FAK: Oh ... t h a t ? CONE: Y e s , s t u p i d . P a t t y , you t a k e t h i s . PATTY: T h i s ? T h i s ? FAK: Oh, I see — t h a t ! CONE: When I say "heave": heave. O.K. One! Two! Three! — FAK: ( s t u m b l e s a g a i n s t DODO). Oh pardon. PATTY: Oh! CONE: Shy, you s t u p i d . FAK: Oh, I;m e v e r so s o r r y . CONE: You s t u p i d clumsy t h i n g , you. A p o l o g i z e . A p o l o g i z e t o Dodo. FAK: P l e a s e e x c u s e me., I'm e v e r so s o r r y . Beg pa r d o n . CONE: A b i t more t o you — mind t h e w r i n k l e . FAK: The what? PATTY: The w r i n k l e ! The w r i n k l e ! FAK: Oh, t h e w r i n k l e . PATTY: I f one o f you s t o o d i n t h e m i d d l e — CONE: I ' l l s t a n d i n t h e m i d d l e — FAK: No. I want t o . CONE: No, I want t o . Page 32 22k FAK: No, I want t o . CONE: Oh, v e r y w e l ... PATTY: Take y o u r shoes o f f . FAK: What! PATTY: I f you t h i n k a n y t h i n g o f Dodo y o u ' l l t a k e y o u r shoes o f f b e f o r e you s t a n d on h e r n i c e c a r p e t . FAK: Oh heck. CONE: L e t ' s a l l t a k e our shoes o f f . FAK: Oh a l l r i g h t . I f we a l l do. (CONE, FAK and PATTY remove t h e i r , s h o e s . ) Your f e e t s m e l l . CONE: They d o n ' t . FAK: They do. PATTY: You've got a h o l e i n y o u r sock. FAK: So's he. PATTY: Cor! Don't i t l o o k s i l l y . What a l a r k . Why don't you mend i t ? CONE: Oh, come on. L e t ' s g e t out o f h e r e . FAK: What about G r e t a ? CONE: ( i r r i t a t e d ) . L e t ' s g e t o u t . FAK: ( t o DODO). G l a d you l i k e t h e p r e s e n t ... I s a i d g l a d y ou l i k e i t ... What you t h i n k about t h e p r e s e n t , eh? ... You l i k e i t , don't you? ... W e l l , go on, say s o m e t h i n g , i t ' s o n l y p o l i t e ... n i c e , i s n ' t i t ? ... I s a i d it.-'s n i c e ... i t ' s n i c e ... you do l i k e i t , don't you? .. Go on say you do ... Go on ... You do l i k e i t , don't you ... you do, don't you ... You got t o say you do ... you got t o . You got t o say you do ... you do, don;t you ... you do — you do, don't y o u , you do ... eh? What? ... What ... what ... what ... what's t h e m a t t e r ? I s a i d what's th e m a t t e r ? ... Oh ... oh heck ... oh h e l l , oh b l o o d y h e l l ... oh b l o o d y b l o o d y ... l o o k ! Page 33 I t ' s g o i n g ! I t ' s b l o o d y g o i n g ! I'm b l o o d y t a k i n g i t away! Look! Look! What's t h e m a t t e r w i t h him? What s h a l l we do w i t h i t ? Wrap i t up i n brown pape r . ( s e e i n g DODO's p i l e o f o l d r a g s ) . T h e y ' l l do. No! Eh? No! What! No! No! (FAK and DODO, t h e i r j o y g r o w i n g , t u s s l e f o r t h e r a g s . ) No! No! No!• No! No! No! No! No! No! No! ( l a u g h i n g ) . Oh s i l l y , s i l l y Faky-boy. Oh my, i s n ' t i t b l a r n e y , g i r l . Oh h o r r i b l e , h o r r i b l e . My God My God My God My God My God My God My God. (FAK l e t s go t h e r a g s and s n a t c h e s up t h e newspapers.) Ooops! Y i p p e e ! (They s t a n d DEAN u p r i g h t and wrap h im i n newspapers, w i n d i n g s c o t c h t a p e around h i m t o h o l d t h e pa p e r s i n p l a c e . Note: STEVE may g i v e them t h e t a p e , i f t h e r e seems t o be a p r o b l e m k e e p i n g t h e "body" u p r i g h t , t h e n STEVE may be a b l e t o h e l p w i t h commands on h i s i n s t r u m e n t s . ) No No No No - , Throw Throw Throw Throw So So So So Blow Blow Blow Blow Crow Crow Crow Crow Page 34 Doe Doe Doe Doe What you got t h e r e ? Sandwiches? S t r o n g and n e a t . T h a t ' s what I c a l l a p a c k e t . ( R e a d i n g a h e a d l i n e f r o m t h e pa p e r ) "London p o l i c e m a n b e a t e n by an i r o n b a r . " H u r r a h ! (FAK s t i c k s a h a t on DEAN's head.) Got a penny f o r t h e guy, M i s t e r ! Got a penny f o r t h e guy. Got a penny f o r t h e guy. Got a penny f o r t h e guy. T o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t . T o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t . Got a penny f o r t h e guy. Got a penny f o r t h e guy. (STEVE p i c k s up t h e rhythm. The r e s t p r e t e n d t o be  p l a y i n g i n s t r u m e n t s . ) T o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t . T o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t . Bang Bang Bang Bang. Got a penny f o r t h e guy. Got a penny f o r t h e guy. Wow wow wow wow Wow wow wow wow T o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t . T o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t l e t o o t . Tcha! (CONE, FAK and PATTY b e g i n t o dance round DEAN as round  a totem: b e l l o w i n g words a t t h e head wrapped i n news- paper . ) Wow wow wow wow wow wow, wow wow wow. Guy guy guy guy guy guy guy guy. Bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang. (CONE, FAK and PATTY b e g i n f r e n z i e d l y t o t e a r t h e paper f r o m DEAN.) Page 35 227 CONE: Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! FAK: Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! PATTY: Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! DEAN: Stop CONE: ( h o l d i n g o ut t h e Ame r i c a n p a c k ) . C i g a r e t t e ? (DEAN s t r e t c h e s out h i s hand and w a i t s . CONE p u t s t h e c i g a r e t t e i n DEAN's hand. CONE w a l k s away s u l k i n g and  angr y . ) DEAN: ( i n c l u d i n g t h e a u d i e n c e ) . W e ' l l now have a l l i t t l e peace — a l i t t l e t r a n q u i l l i t y . I'm s e r i o u s . I'm c a l l i n g a t r u c e f o r one m i n u t e . F o r one whole m i n u t e nobody up h e r e i s g o i n g t o do a n y t h i n g and you can a l l r e l a x . N o t h i n g ' s g o i n g t o happen up h e r e . N o t h i n g at a l l . (To t h e o t h e r s ) You u n d e r s t a n d ? PATTY & FAK: ( i n c h a r a c t e r ) . Y e s , a l l r i g h t . DEAN: A l l r i g h t ... You can j u s t r e l a x . J u s t l e t go. O.K. • one m i n u t e f r o m now ... ( A f t e r s u f f i c i e n t t i m e , t o DODO) F e e l i n g b e t t e r ? (CONE r i s e s . ) T h a t ' s a l l r i g h t . Time's up. (F o r DODO.) Saw a s i l v e r f e a t h e r F l o a t i n g i n t h e sun — Reached up and caught i t . That was one. Saw a g o l d e n nugget G l i t t ' r i n g down below — Dug deep and found i t . That was two. Saw a p e a r l y o y s t e r Page 36 228 Washed out t o sea — Swam out and fe t ched i t . That was t h r e e . (CONE goes as i f to e x i t t h e n , see ing something  o u t s i d e , f l a t t e n s h i m s e l f . ) FAK: ( w h i s p e r i n g ) . What i s i t ? CONE: Them. FAK: Aldgate? CONE: 'Bout e i g h t of them. A l l round out there they a r e . FAK: L e t ' s have a l o o k . CONE: Keep back h e r e , you can j u s t — c a r e f u l ! I f they see us we won' t have a — FAK: Gawd! CONEr: Where's Greta eh? Where i s she? Why a i n ' t she here? DEAN: Who's out there? CONE: Never you mind. DEAN: F r i e n d s of yours? CONE: Yeah, f r i e n d s of o u r s . Why d o n ' t you go have a l i t t l e chat ? (Pause.DEAN s t a r t s to e x i t . ) FAK: T h e y ' l l smash y o u . (Pause.) DEAN: (to DODO). J u s t you w a i t t h e r e , honey. D o n ' t you s t i r ,f t i l l I come back. FAK: T h e y ' l l k i l l y o u . ( E x i t DEAN. CONE,,. FAK and PATTY watch him o u t s i d e . ) Cor ! PATTY: What 's happened? FAK:- Cor ! PATTY: Let me see! Let me see! FAK: Look at t h a t . W i l l you j u s t look at t h a t . Page 37 229 (FAK and PATTY e x i t . ) CONE: What you want t o go w i t h h im f o r ? Why you want t o go w i t h him? A i n ' t you g o i n g t o w a i t f o r G r e t a ? ... G r e t a ... I ' l l t e l l h e r ... I ' l l t e l l ... I ' l l go and f i n d h e r and t e l l h e r ... t e l l G r e t a ... G r e t a ... Mamma! Mamma! Where a r e y o u , Mamma? Why you l e f t me? ... (Going) Mamma! ( O f f ) Mamma! G r e t a ! ... (DODO p l a y s w i t h t h e l i g h t . STEVE s t a r t s t o t a p a rhythm. DODO keeps t i m e a l l o w i n g t h e sound and t h e . t e x t u r e o f the l i g h t t o g o v e r n h e r body. Pause. STEVE comes t o h e r . ) STEVE: You're a l l r i g h t . But you l e t them push y ou around s u c h a l o t . I mean you l e t them push you around such a l o t i n t h e p l a y . (DODO l o o k s a t him , l i g h t s s t a r t t o come, up f o r i n t e r v a l .  DODO h a s t i l y c l e a r s o f f . ) (End o f A c t One) D u r i n g t h e i n t e r v a l STEVE might r e m a i n on s t a g e ,  a t t e n d i n g t o h i s i n s t r u m e n t s , d o i n g odd j o b s around  t h e s t a g e , c h a t t i n g t o s t a g e hands e t c . Page 38 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093278/manifest

Comment

Related Items