So, we're staying at this site for our blogging. Sorry I took the momentum out of our earlier blogfest. My fantasy of finding or creating a dream site has yet to materialize.
I want to play a little catch-up. Many things have taken place;
we've divested ourselves of the need for a specific oppositional narrative, we've begun crafting animation, we've looked at and discussed the use of the Kinect, job descriptions have been sent to David, Angela has taken the position of A.D.
I think it best at this point to toss out a couple of topics;
Discuss our process thus far. Is it frustrating? Is it moving too slow? too fast?
Is it working? Just blow some jazz here.
AND
We had a read through last week and, although it was fine and useful, it was not as crisp as our first. As a result, the structure we were attempting to impose or affirm was torn asunder (my solution did not work). Which was great to know and sent me scurrying for my producer hat.
I want your thoughts on the efficacy of the readings and what they did and did not bring to the table in terms of our process. Was it too soon to bring new people to the campfire?
And, anything else you want to share.
Alright guys, looking forward to it.
I agree that the reading last week was useful however, I also believe as we are working toward all getting on the same page of what DarkRide is we are not there yet and bringing in new people felt like it made everything a little more fuzzy.
ReplyDeleteAs for the oppositional narrative I am unsure what everyone thinks this should be. Amorphous ? Should it be a clear story displayed behind the actors on the screen? I feel like it would help me brainstorm and see in my mind how we will utilize the media wall if we talked about it more in one of our meetings what everyone else sees.
I agree with something that was mentioned at our meeting last night about moving, at least somewhat, beyond the brainstorming phase and having something concrete to show for our work soon. On my end, that would be putting work into getting the intro animation together. I also like the idea of having the entire first act mapped out/storyboarded by the end of the semester if the video wall is in fact going to be mostly light effects in act 1. Having a specific goal laid out and some kind of general timeline in which that goal needs to be completed would really help me get things straight and feel like I'm accomplishing/contributing something.
ReplyDeleteI think I feel like how a lot of people charged to craft something with a deadline do in that we feel the constant biting urge to have something concrete so that we can start building. We may not be at that point yet, though, so I feel like we need to do what you've been talking about, getting into the script, nailing down the feeling for the scenes, and decide what is needed. Get our knuckles dirty in the script. Nothing can even be planned out unless we have a unified feeling each scene, especially if even part of the media has a concurrent narrative to the action of the stage. I don't think we're moving too slow, but we may be spinning our wheels a bit.
ReplyDeleteAs for the readings, I've always felt like actor readings always took you steps back rather than steps forward, but in a way that it makes you revisit parts of the play you may have overlooked and reassess if they are working for your production. Introducing actors now invites them into the conceptual process of this play, which I'm not sure they need to be. I think actors strengths lie in taking the concept laid down and breathing air into it onstage. Leave their heads unsullied with the burden of the behind the scenes crafting of the production, and let them inhabit the world they're charged to inhabit. Bring them to the table when we need their insight over what parts of our concept work and what doesn't.
We do have the benefit of most of us being trained actors who are used to dissecting a script from an actors standpoint. I've been in that position dozens of times before myself. I think we can use our own experience to create an insight into the world that will be presented onstage through our readings of the script. Let's use some of our these talents to influence our decisions.
I must say that of all the collaborative theatre projects I've done this is going to be the MOST collaborative. I say most becasue each of us brings something entirely different to the table. And we are at different points in our creative lives. This is a great thing!
ReplyDeleteAs others haved mentioned I think the first step without a doubt is to dig deeper into the script itself. The answers are always in the words. We need to take the script apart scene-by-painstaking-scene. I'm guessing this will comprise a great part of our meetings after we return from Spring break.
As for progress, this doesn't seem to be a project that one can discuss in terms of "slow" or "fast" progress. I see it more as an excavation, where many nights we're sifting through dirt to find the one artifact that helps complete the puzzle. The more we dig, the more artifacts we'll find and the clearer this picture will become. However, I do think it's important to at least decide upon the tools with which we conduct our search.
I absolutely agree that we invited others in a little too soon. In retrospect having the second reading with people wholly unfamiliar with what we're doing was not the best idea. But again, every step, or misstep as it were, is a chance for us to learn.
Lastly, I understand the call for something "concrete." However, the script hardly lends itself to anything concrete, and perhaps that's the heart of some frustrations. It is a play that requires patience, but make no mistake this play is groundable. I think once we really give the script a close reading, those elements of "concreteness" will present themselves.
Post-human texts and examples are forthcoming.
Angela, I think there's misunderstanding about making the play "concrete". I don't think the play should be concrete in the way you are describing. It doesn't fit the play and would disservice the play to treat it as such. I feel like this is pretty evident itself in the play. The "concreteness" I talk about has nothing to do with the interpretation of the play, but more of our resolve in the production of the concept of the play. My concern is with the unity of the piece. Specifically, I concern myself with the ability to tie the media in with the play in a way that not only makes sense with the central idea of the play, but one that creates its own artistic persona that reaffirms the idea of the play. Even the most lucid or volatile script has a ground to build off of creatively. We need to find that ground, have that communicated to the whole group, and grow. We have some grounding already, such as the journey and totemic ideas, but it still lack something with unity to build ideas out of. Without that, the elements of the play may become embalanced and lose much of the flow and function of the play.
ReplyDeleteI would like to add that this process does feel backwards to me. Generally, I get a feel for the play, get an idea of what would be a good way to communicate the idea, and then implement technology as a means to an end. In this process, I almost feel like the video wall is the end in itself. Kind of a "Let's do a play with a video wall". In making that kind of statement, the next thing that would come to my mind is "How do I use the video wall to effectively communicate the ideas of a play." This leads me to a process of experimentation. To perform this project well, I think we need to play with the video wall through the whole process and let it have as much of a role in conducting the flow of this play as our own personal ideas. It needs to be a lab where we constantly experiment with theories of how to communicate this play with the wall. Bring in actors to interact with the wall itself. Find the malleability of its design. How can we shape it? What aspects does it fail at? Right now, we know the wall has a lot of potential, but it's not showing it to us right now. I want to have an open communication with the wall. We don't know what it can do yet. We have ideas of how to use it, but they're stilted. Let's let that wall tell us how to use it.
I have one idea that I think would be helpful in letting this wall infiltrate our collective insight on how to use it effectively. Can we get a drawing program (photoshop, etc., even Gimp, it's free) on the wall? I would like to actually sketch on the wall while actors worked in front of it, with Scott directing ideas, getting a direct and fast flow of ideas. Scott, you proposed wanting to storyboard the play. I propose this idea as a means of storyboarding. Have the rest of the group their to add in and find other ways to use the wall effectively. It seems like one process that could help a lot in servicing the play while meeting our goals of how to use the wall.
Casey, I think "amorphous" is not as precise a metaphor as "fluid" might be.
ReplyDeleteWe are dealing with a number of different modules that must all fit together and the two narratives are simply module #1 & module #2 or whatever numbers we assign to them based on their particular importance at any particular time. So, the oppositional narrative is the most highly fluid component, ready to bend to our will should time and technology coerce changes.
Erin, this next week will be clarifying and, I think, start a different kind of focused energy.
ReplyDeleteThe type of energy that I believe can sustain a project like this.
We should also revisit course expectations at our next class meet.