Summary Class 2 By Panagiotis

Contemporary Theatremaking: Week Two

Hello everyone! Let us summarize what events took place in this week’s seminar. This week, the seminar could be separated in two halves. The first one is the, should we say, “theoretical half”, while the second is the “practical half”. We should note that for this week’s seminar, we had to read two articles concerning Devised Theatre, as this week’s general theme was Devised Theatre.

So, starting with the “theoretical” first half, we should talk about the articles. The first one is an extract from the book “Devising Theatre: A Practical and Theoretical Handbook”, by Alison Oddey, while the second one was from the book “Making a Performance: Devising Histories and Contemporary Practices”, by Emma Govan, Helen Nicholson and Katie Normington. In the beginning of the seminar, groups of four and five students were assigned, in order to talk about the two articles, and then, the groups shared each one, its ideas with the others. So, below are the main points raised in today’s seminar, concerning Devised Theatre.

· We can not produce a single clear cut definition for what Devised Theatre is, because every theatre company uses its own methods, but an accurate enough definition would be that the Devised Theatre includes four basic points: 1) A process with which a team can merge and interpret its ideas, and produce a play, 2) Collaboration between all members towards the production, 3) Multivision concerning the various views, opinions and beliefs by members of the team, and finally 4) Creation of an artistic product, through the use of these ideas, beliefs, etc.

· The Devised Theatre as a genre did not began in the 1960’s and 70’s, but it is however this period the one in which it grew in size and variety.

· Reasons for this expansion at that certain period are the various liberation movements that found a voice at that period, such as the feminist and the civil rights movements, whose views are often expressed in Devised Theatre. Also, the ever growing experimentation in arts that took place back then, also aided in the expansion of a different form of theatre, other than the normal text-based theatre. Also, the bigger leap towards democracy at that time can also be echoed in Devised Theatre, where there is democracy in the way that the play is produced, by all of the performers putting down their ideas and integrating them into the play.

· Due to economy reasons mostly, in the 1990’s most of the Devised Theatre companies have adopted a system where they keep some people for the key posts in the company, and then hire performers to participate (because it would be far more expensive to maintain a contract with all of them), and this results to less democracy between the group members.

· In Devised Theatre, everyone contributes with ideas (which are usually affected by his/her own experiences, beliefs, etc) towards the production of a play. Also, everyone in the group must be “multi talented”, with knowledge in technical areas such as lighting and dressing, which in general can be described as versatility from the part of each of the members of a group, in distinction with text-based theatre, where the play is already there, with the playwright giving the ideas, the director the interpretation, and the actors only the performance. Also, in text-based theatre, there are already members of staff each chosen for a particular technical task, which means that no such versatility is demanded from the performers’ part.

· The aim of Devising Theatre is usually to address political, educational and artistic issues.

· There is a distinction between Devised Theatre and the conventional text-based theatre. There are many differences concerning their methods, limitations and their way of using their personnel. While, as it was pointed out, Oddey leans towards the idea that text-based theatre is different from Devised Theatre, it was discussed that Govan et al. in their article propose that we should not regard them as two different things.

· Finally, a small debate was held in certain periods of time, according the idea that there can be unlimited creativity, as well as democracy in Devised Theatre.

Now, moving on to the second part of the seminar, we went on doing various exercises and games that could be used by a Devising theatrical team, in order not only to strengthen the bonds and create trust between members, but also to train them in the physical demands that the Devised Theatre so often requires from its members.

Firstly we started with name games, like being in a circle and each one telling his/her name. It is important to be able to know each other in the group, so that basic skills of communication and bondage can be built between team members. The second name game (“volleyball” as it was called), was played out in two circles, with half the persons of the group in one circle, and half to the other. In each circle the members would do the same thing. They would call the name of another member in the circle and then go and take their place, so that they should call and other member’s name, and go and take their place, and so on and so forth. Then, people from the two circles were swapped, so that now two new circles were created, and finally the two circles merged into one, again following the same procedure.

The next game, was moving around the space, and then stopping and greeting the other persons when we were asked to do so, in a certain way. For example, at one time we were asked to greet anybody who we met, as someone who we do not trust, then again, at another point we had to greet them like friends we hadn’t seen in a long time. The purpose of this exercise is to learn to work with others.

Next exercises were the “impulse” and the “zip-zap” ones. In both we had to stand

in a circle, and while in the first we have to hold our adjacent peoples’ hands, and squeeze it a little in turns (for example one squeezes his left partner’s hand, and he does the same to his left partner etc), the second exercise is about “passing an electric shock” to the others, using the word “zip”. These two games are both games of concentration and collaboration with the others.

Finally, in this seminar, we had to do two improvising exercises. In the first exercise, called “machines”, in groups of 5 and 6 people, we had to use our bodies to form a machine (there were three examples that we did: a truck, a lorry and a food processor), while in the second one, called the room, we had to each go inside a room from one door (the whole thing was imaginary, we had to mime any action we did), do something which was up to us to decide, and then exit from one door, keeping in mind to maintain some sort of continuity between what each and every one of us did. While both of the exercises encourage collaboration, the first one is a very good one for physical theatre practice (one major part of Devised Theatre), while the second one Is a very good introduction in mime (one other vital part of Devised Theatre).

So, in conclusion, this week’s seminar was an introduction to Devised Theatre, with both theoretical and practical skills used towards our better understanding of this sort of theatre.

Panagiotis