Author: Dale

present: Marc, Dale, Jeff B

Dale brought in his script, “We’re queer [pdf],” and Marc insisted that we read through it, as a stalling tactic to avoid the Vocal Sequence.

But then we did begin looking at the entire Vocal sequence. Dale has printed out a cheat sheet [pdf] with all 20 parts and their descriptions, and Marc suggested that he begin by going through the first three (which is accepted practice), and then we were to call out other parts and he’d explore them. That way we could tell which one he was doing and record our impressions and questions about each one.

After he was through, we quizzed him about a few of the moments/parts in order to clarify what we saw, and we discussed some ways that the results of such exploration could be used in a final product.

Dale volunteered to try it, and we did the same process. Finally Jeff took the plunge. [Flesh out the experience in the comments, please.]

Dale asked that we re-read “We’re queer” and critique for effectiveness: how to make the point, how to keep it light and funny but pointed, etc.

Jeff departed, and Dale and Marc chatted a moment further. Marc had the idea of performing the same text as a moment of awful self-discovery among the characters. We read through it in that vein, and it becomes mordantly funny that way. Dale suggests that we perform it straight, as it were, and then later in whatever evening it ends up in, the second way.

We didn’t get to an idea for an exercise Dale had, called “Montage.” See Assignments below.

NEXT: Jan. 28, 6:30, NSOD

• TEXTS: Jeff’s Myth [doc], “We’re queer [pdf],
• PATHS: Vocal Sequence duos
• HOMEWORK:
  • (Neo-Futurist scripts)
  • keep bringing in text, either randomly selected from one’s own library, or some online library like Forgotten Books; multiple sources OK; we’re dumping these in our box for use… somehow
  • an idea from Structuring Drama Work: Montage exercise <–download the text for the full assignment
    

present: Marc, Dale, Jeff B, Barbara

Shortish session tonight. Dale put up the poster version of Marc’s part-2 [rtf] that we had analyzed back in December and Marc chatted about what he saw.

Then Marc started us off on a quick toss exercise using the Vocal Sequence as a basis. This lasted about 30 minutes, using the text She sounds like she can no longer tolerate anything the rest of them are saying.

We sat and talked about the process, the ways it might be useful and some of the things we noticed when we were working. One thing we agreed on was that it would be very helpful to videotape our work, and/or to have more people involved who could watch and notate things they found interesting. Marc talked about using that kind of process in his past work.

One of our concerns, articulated by Barbara, was the uncomfortable feeling we had about movement. Dale suggested that we get one of the NSOD teachers, Annette, to come teach us contact improv as a means of developing those skills.

Dale had written a piece, a simple catalog/list of the items on his totally trashed desk. Jeff read it for us. We talked about having a video/slideshow to accompany it.

Dale brought up a couple of shows currently in NYC that caught his eye because it seemed that they had used the same kinds of processes that we’ve been playing with. The discussion turned to our eventual “results,” and when Marc asked “What is it you want to see?,” Dale asked everyone to envision a performance by us and to scribble down notes.

They were as follows:

Marc:

• informal & prof0undly altering, at once
• something we found unexpectedly
• somewhat musical, somewhat overwhelming
• I am not an earnest person, but I like to travel miles in all directions
• 2 hrs. of Jeff laughing at me
• something kind of thick
• …and stories, of course

Barbara:

• minimal costumes/set/props
• lights, voice, movement, text* leveraged for an expression of what’s beautiful & true about ourselves
  • *the texts are questions, theorems, proofs, writings, stories, character

Dale:

• familiar vs. unfamiliar texts
• choral deconstruction
• postmodern pastiche: skits, monologs, more
• moments of true emotion
• topic(s) that resonate with our audience
• !!organic forward movement –> beginning, middle, end
• comedy, confession, confusion
• moments of elaborate stagecraft in a poor theatre kind of way
• roll of white butcher paper, strewn, crumpled, utilized

Jeff:

• Us.
  • (Not NYC)

Jeff and Barbara had to leave early to attend to family; Marc and Dale stayed and chatted about how to proceed and what shape our explorations might take.

• Marc is going to think about ways to develop Vocal Sequence duo/trio work.
• Dale has an idea for a piece, “We’re Queer,” that might give us a topic to work with, i.e., the nature of being a creative person in an uncreative setting. (Marc, talk in comments about your idea of a hoax, and then see here and here.)
• Dale will look at possible exercises based on the ideas in Structuring Drama Work. (Keep your eye on the blog between now and then. If he comes up with something, it will appear here as an assignment to bring stuff in for.)

NEXT: Jan. 21, 6:30, NSOD

• TEXTS: part-2, Jeff’s Myth [doc]
• PATHS: Vocal Sequence
• HOMEWORK:
  • (Neo-Futurist script)
  • keep bringing in text, either randomly selected from one’s own library, or some online library like Forgotten Books; multiple sources OK; we’re dumping these in our box for use… somehow
  • possible assignment based on Structuring Drama Work

present: Dale, Jeff B., Barbara, Jeff A.

Dale unrolled the triple-poster printout of Marc’s part-2 text [rtf], only to find that instead of the version everyone worked on in the 12/17/08 session, it was a clean copy, and one that had not printed the right-hand third of the last poster. Perfect!

We began with the first five steps of the Vocal Sequence again as a warm-up.

Jeff Allen then gave his new Neo-Futurist monolog to Barbara to read. It was a variation on the “I need to write something” trope, and it worked.

Jeff A. also had us read through “Give & Take,” a hysterical Neo-Futurist skit from 200 more Neo-Futurist plays. It would be fun to add to an evening of theatre.

We returned to part-2. Barbara suggested that we brainstorm as many ways to perform the text as we could thing of. Dale set the timer for two minutes, and we came up with:

1. a monolog
2. rearrange pieces of it
3. backwards
4. dramatic interpretation
5. change the verbs
6. as a dance
7. mime, holding up the words
8. metaperformance, like Jeff’s idea from last session
9. choral anthem
10. audition piece
11. diagram the sentences
12. as a Marx Bros. routine
13. grade it as homework
14. edit (??)
15. make it rhyme
16. talk back to it, sass it
17. cycle through film genres
18. props, without words
19. hand puppets
20. nude
21. as a musical

Dale then used the random number generator to pick one, #4, dramatic interpretation, and we gave ourselves another two minutes:

1. black box/empty set
2. Chekhov
3. political thriller
4. children’s bedtime story
5. Noh theatre
6. gossiping over tea
7. medieval mystery play
8. opera
9. absurdist piece
10. elementary class play
11. Julie Andrews vehicle
12. dysfunctional family drama
13. police procedural
14. therapy session
15. Seussian tale (??not sure of the handwriting)

Again with the random number generator, and again #4, the bedtime story. Barbara began telling us wee ones the bedtime story, and we both interspersed lines and repeated lines and added our own commentary. It was interesting.

We went back to the main list with the random number generator, and we got #1, monolog. Dale tackled it as a solo piece; miraculously, he convinced everyone he was making perfect sense.

Next was #6, dance, and Jeff danced the first page. We then drew #9, choral anthem, and skipped it.

Finally, Barbara took on #12, audition piece, and Dale was her auditioner, requesting expansions and redirections of the piece. Jeff was the janitor.

As a quickie ending, we threw out #15, Marx Bros., and got a couple of laughs with some delivery. Mike Funt: download the text and turn it into a Marx Bros. routine.

It occured to us that we could take the text and do an evening’s work with it, starting perhaps with the monolog so that the audience could get the whole piece at once, then hitting bits and pieces of the text through the filters of our list (and other ideas). The audience would begin to form their own connections and ideas, perhaps.

It was also suggested as a performance that we could have a pool of available texts, to be matched randomly with performance modes, and improvise performances that way.

Ideas for Neo-Futurist monologs:

• grocery list; e.g., a piece about one’s grocery list, perhaps the one you’d like people to think you have
• desktop; e.g., what’s on your desk and why

NEXT: Jan. 14, 6:30, NSOD

• TEXTS: part-2, Jeff’s Myth [doc]
• PATHS: Vocal Sequence
• HOMEWORK:
  • Neo-Futurist script
  • five pages of text, either randomly selected from one’s own library, or some online library like Forgotten Books; multiple sources OK

(I thought I’d put something up before the year is quite over. Sorry about the delay.)

Present: Dale, Jeff B., Barbara, Jeff A.

Dale put up the huge poster version of Marc’s part-2 [rtf] and we all contemplated it for a moment.

Then Dale outlined the first five phases of the Vocal Sequence [pdf]:

1. Speak silently.
2. Speak normally.
3. Slow motion.
4. Introjecting.
5. Project atmosphere.

We began playing with the VS, using selected phrases from the text. We assume we were getting introjection wrong; Marc was not there to guide us. We also decided that was completely OK. We were just getting our feet wet, and if we developed something useful, so much the better.

After working on the VS as our warmup, we tackled the text. Dale proposed as an exercise to treat the text as a vehicle for performance, unlimited by any reality. We began to color-code themes and strands and actually had an interesting time. We decided to keep our findings to ourselves and spring them on Marc at the next session.