Another application of the work that I found helpful for our text work was the idea of how when we are on stage we are constantly receiving energy from one source, holding it for a while, and then passing it on. He mentioned that sometimes we do want the energy and are happy to receive it, sometimes we do not want the energy and can pass it to someone else quickly, and sometimes we don't know what to do with it.
When we don't know what to do we experience a bit of a Crisis. Ragnar says that usually when we experience this, we "tame" the energy of the crisis with one or another device.
It made me think of the crisis moments of the text circle in our own technique and how we ought to be able to trust that being completely open to the other person will draw something out of us that is real, if we are open enough to reverence the crisis without trying to "tame" it.
I asked people not to "plan" what text they would use, but simply to go into the text circle with openness and to suspend IN the crisis until the text that the other draws out of us truly comes out. It was interesting to see the progression and how we resisted at first, but by the end of the exercise we were humming.
What was the crisis like for you? I saw some good honest work come out when people were able not to tame it, but to ride into it.
Thoughts?
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Working With Ragnar: Three Views
This past Sunday working with Ragnar Freidank, master teacher of Michael Chekhov Technique, brought new perspective to our own training and highlighted elements common to both that work well together.
In the first part of the session, Ragnar led us through personal exploration, almost as if we were inventing new "techniques." This felt freeing and clown-like, calling back the sense of wonder and joy that is so important in clown work. It also was a fresh way to access impulse in addition to the ways we have been working with impulse recently.
One of the first frames Ragnar asked us to consider was to imagine that we could see ourselves as we work and track where our attention goes as we work.
He mentioned three possible objects of focus: the "me" that has the idea of what to do, the "me" that does it, and the "me" that assesses how well it is going.
For me it was interesting in many ways. It seemed a good balance to go back and forth from one to another, and yet it revealed a prejudice. I found myself most pleased when I was "doing." And the inner voice of judgment seemed loudest when I was either in the "idea" me or the "assessing" me. So many teachers tell us not to think, yet Stanislavsky was always reminding his students that technique is a way to go to the unconscious through the conscious. But the prejudice against ideas and assessment seems to neglect these two important factors needed for a good balance.
How could I jump into doing without recognizing (with joy) the idea's source? Allowing myself to place my consciousness there occasionally reminded me of the presence of "Monsieur Marceau" in Gaulier's Clown Technique: if the clown is stuck and is not sure what to do, he simply asks his friend "M. Marceau, What should I do?" Of course anything the clown hears is right, the issue then becomes acting upon it and for how long.
Equally strong is the temptation to think that assessment would be stifling to the moment. But again in clown technique, it is only through a view of honestly assessing how well the process is going that we ever get to the clown's "drop"... that moment of honesty where the clown recognizes that there is trouble and then wiggles its way out of it in one way or another.
The trick seems to be able to float from any one of these views to the other without being tyrannized buy one sole view. Even if it seems to be the view with the most "freedom," if it is the only view and makes us neglect the other aspects then we need to let go even of this so-called freedom in the hopes of discovering a new freedom which includes all views without favoring one above the other, but allows each way of being to be useful to the process as a whole.
I asked the company to think of a freeplay of these three views as we went into physical training. What were some of your experiences of allowing these views to enter into the training?
In the first part of the session, Ragnar led us through personal exploration, almost as if we were inventing new "techniques." This felt freeing and clown-like, calling back the sense of wonder and joy that is so important in clown work. It also was a fresh way to access impulse in addition to the ways we have been working with impulse recently.
One of the first frames Ragnar asked us to consider was to imagine that we could see ourselves as we work and track where our attention goes as we work.
He mentioned three possible objects of focus: the "me" that has the idea of what to do, the "me" that does it, and the "me" that assesses how well it is going.
For me it was interesting in many ways. It seemed a good balance to go back and forth from one to another, and yet it revealed a prejudice. I found myself most pleased when I was "doing." And the inner voice of judgment seemed loudest when I was either in the "idea" me or the "assessing" me. So many teachers tell us not to think, yet Stanislavsky was always reminding his students that technique is a way to go to the unconscious through the conscious. But the prejudice against ideas and assessment seems to neglect these two important factors needed for a good balance.
How could I jump into doing without recognizing (with joy) the idea's source? Allowing myself to place my consciousness there occasionally reminded me of the presence of "Monsieur Marceau" in Gaulier's Clown Technique: if the clown is stuck and is not sure what to do, he simply asks his friend "M. Marceau, What should I do?" Of course anything the clown hears is right, the issue then becomes acting upon it and for how long.
Equally strong is the temptation to think that assessment would be stifling to the moment. But again in clown technique, it is only through a view of honestly assessing how well the process is going that we ever get to the clown's "drop"... that moment of honesty where the clown recognizes that there is trouble and then wiggles its way out of it in one way or another.
The trick seems to be able to float from any one of these views to the other without being tyrannized buy one sole view. Even if it seems to be the view with the most "freedom," if it is the only view and makes us neglect the other aspects then we need to let go even of this so-called freedom in the hopes of discovering a new freedom which includes all views without favoring one above the other, but allows each way of being to be useful to the process as a whole.
I asked the company to think of a freeplay of these three views as we went into physical training. What were some of your experiences of allowing these views to enter into the training?
Saturday, December 3, 2011
Spy Back
Chekhov emphasizes that as actors in rehearsal and performance, when we are properly concentrated we are one with our images and intentions. We are accessing full creativity. We are present enough to allow this flow of creativity to be realized and to get out of our own way.
We want to be led by our imagination not by our intellect. This is not necessarily easy since our intellect is used to being in control, in charge of our lives. But Chekhov said the intellect is an enemy to the artist - he called it the "little intellect." This is the critic, the judge, the divisive one that lives in us. While it can be useful in many areas of our life, it works against us when we are working in the creative state.
So, we can analyze it later. When we have finished a particular rehearsal or exercise, then we can take the time to evaluate what was working and how it was working in us. This is the time to put the little intellect to work, and then it is contributing to the creative process in its proper way. Chekhov called this spying back.
I have mentioned this term in the couple lessons I have led, but here I would like to post the questions he recommends you ask yourself after every exercise or rehearsal. The answers are meant to be shared with one another as we all grow and learn together in the technique. Here they are:
~ What was I concentrated on?
~ What does this movement mean to me?
~ What was my experience of this?
~ Where do I feel/experience a connection to this?
~ Is this something I recognize or know?
~ Can I do it again?
~ Where/How can I use it?
We want to be led by our imagination not by our intellect. This is not necessarily easy since our intellect is used to being in control, in charge of our lives. But Chekhov said the intellect is an enemy to the artist - he called it the "little intellect." This is the critic, the judge, the divisive one that lives in us. While it can be useful in many areas of our life, it works against us when we are working in the creative state.
So, we can analyze it later. When we have finished a particular rehearsal or exercise, then we can take the time to evaluate what was working and how it was working in us. This is the time to put the little intellect to work, and then it is contributing to the creative process in its proper way. Chekhov called this spying back.
I have mentioned this term in the couple lessons I have led, but here I would like to post the questions he recommends you ask yourself after every exercise or rehearsal. The answers are meant to be shared with one another as we all grow and learn together in the technique. Here they are:
~ What was I concentrated on?
~ What does this movement mean to me?
~ What was my experience of this?
~ Where do I feel/experience a connection to this?
~ Is this something I recognize or know?
~ Can I do it again?
~ Where/How can I use it?
Friday, December 2, 2011
The Four Brothers
Hello all,
I would like to introduce to you the Four Brothers. The brothers are actually feelings and they are always present(or should be) in our work. They are:
Feeling of Ease
The actor finds this ease as an inner thing much like a feeling. It begins from a desire to have it and it comes because we will it to be there. Once we will it and find it - once we accomplish the task or perform the action with ease - we know it. It is there, and it will be there once you allow it to be there. No matter how difficult the task or movement or exercise, if the feeling of ease is present, we discover just how much energy it takes to accomplish the task...
Feeling of Form
Everything that needs understanding needs form. We work with form in our training all the time, and oftentimes when we are looking for something to work on, we fall back on form. We can always work on form. But as you do, I urge you to experience form as a feeling. After all you are human, and your human body is a form. What does it to feel like to be in your body? Know the particulars, discover the unity, feel the form...
Feeling of Beauty
It's nice to feel beautiful, isn't it. But it's not necessarily easy to feel, it can be elusive since "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and there are many values attached to the feeling of beauty. My teacher Lenard Petit likes to substitute the word authentic for beautiful. Great substitution. Because this brings us to the purity of things, doesn't it? And purity is beautiful, almost unarguably. Chekhov notes that animals in nature are beautiful because they are true to themselves. So in your work, I urge you to play with this feeling of beauty. Remember, it's a pathway to authenticity - there is no need to try to be beautiful or to show us your beauty, just be beautiful...
Feeling of The Whole
This is perhaps even more elusive than beauty, as it can easily become a concept versus an experience. Chekhov was very interested in the Whole of the actor's experience and subsequently the technique was conceived out of the idea that the emotional and psychological can be discovered and explored through the physical. The inner can be found through the outer. As you work, remember that you are a whole actor. And that as a whole actor, you make whole movements and whole sounds, or at least have the possibility to do so. I urge you to put your attention on the whole. What does that feel like...?
*****
If you think about it, every great work of art possesses these four qualities, leading us to a satisfying experience of some sort. Each of the brothers complements and informs the other and are tangible feelings that we can apply to the work. Remember, these are not hard and fast rules; they are simply guideposts to which we can come back, to help us along the way...
See you in training...
Taylor V
I would like to introduce to you the Four Brothers. The brothers are actually feelings and they are always present(or should be) in our work. They are:
Feeling of Ease
The actor finds this ease as an inner thing much like a feeling. It begins from a desire to have it and it comes because we will it to be there. Once we will it and find it - once we accomplish the task or perform the action with ease - we know it. It is there, and it will be there once you allow it to be there. No matter how difficult the task or movement or exercise, if the feeling of ease is present, we discover just how much energy it takes to accomplish the task...
Feeling of Form
Everything that needs understanding needs form. We work with form in our training all the time, and oftentimes when we are looking for something to work on, we fall back on form. We can always work on form. But as you do, I urge you to experience form as a feeling. After all you are human, and your human body is a form. What does it to feel like to be in your body? Know the particulars, discover the unity, feel the form...
Feeling of Beauty
It's nice to feel beautiful, isn't it. But it's not necessarily easy to feel, it can be elusive since "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and there are many values attached to the feeling of beauty. My teacher Lenard Petit likes to substitute the word authentic for beautiful. Great substitution. Because this brings us to the purity of things, doesn't it? And purity is beautiful, almost unarguably. Chekhov notes that animals in nature are beautiful because they are true to themselves. So in your work, I urge you to play with this feeling of beauty. Remember, it's a pathway to authenticity - there is no need to try to be beautiful or to show us your beauty, just be beautiful...
Feeling of The Whole
This is perhaps even more elusive than beauty, as it can easily become a concept versus an experience. Chekhov was very interested in the Whole of the actor's experience and subsequently the technique was conceived out of the idea that the emotional and psychological can be discovered and explored through the physical. The inner can be found through the outer. As you work, remember that you are a whole actor. And that as a whole actor, you make whole movements and whole sounds, or at least have the possibility to do so. I urge you to put your attention on the whole. What does that feel like...?
*****
If you think about it, every great work of art possesses these four qualities, leading us to a satisfying experience of some sort. Each of the brothers complements and informs the other and are tangible feelings that we can apply to the work. Remember, these are not hard and fast rules; they are simply guideposts to which we can come back, to help us along the way...
See you in training...
Taylor V
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)