Artaud - Part 1

Lesson: 26th October 2017

For the next few weeks, we are going to be looking at another practitioner, Artaud, in Miss Starbuck's lessons. Artaud was a French dramatist who worked at around the same time as Brecht. He, however, took a different route to Brecht, and in some ways was somewhat similar to Stanislavski, because he wanted the audience to become emotional when watching a piece, although, Artaud wanted the audience to look into their fears, rather than get lost into the piece that they were watching. Artaud presented the Theatre of Cruelty where he wanted the audience to experience discomfort/confusion about the piece that they were watching. In many of Artaud's pieces, there was no storyline, but rather a theme that ran throughout, which is similar to the political themes presented in Brechtian theatre. His pieces would have minimal dialogue, instead animalistic noises - such as grunts and screams - were used to present the story. He was heavily influenced by surrealism due to a life long addiction to opiates such as heroin. Additionally, he had spells inside mental institutions which also influenced his work.


 He was born on the 4th September 1896 and at 5 had suffered a near fatal attack of meningitis, the effects of which remained with him throughout his life such as emotional and neurological problems. In his teens, he suffered from sharp head pains which also continued throughout his life. In 1914, Artaud was a victim of neurasthenia which is an ill defined medical condition that is associated with emotional disturbance, which was prominent throughout Artaud's life. He was treated in a rest home, but the following year was given opiates whereby he became addicted. Despite joining the army in 1916, he was released a year later due to mental instability and the acquired drug addiction.

In 1918 he committed himself to a clinic in Switzerland where he remained until 1920. After this he went immediately to Paris with medical support, where he studied with Charles Dullin, an actor and director. Artaud found jobs as a stage and screen actor as well as set and costume designer for Dullin. One of the first films that he appeared in in 1924 was Surcourt - le roi des corsairs (Overrun - The King of the Corsairs). He became more interested in the surrealism movement headed by André Breton and in 1923 published a volume of symbolic verse inspired by Breton and others. However, he broke away from the movement when Breton converted to Communism and tried to get the rest of the movement to follow him. despite this, Artaud wrote the film script for La Coquille et le clergyman (The Shell and the Clergyman) which is the most famous surrealist film made.

Artaud was also a producer and in 1927 founded the Théatre Alfred Jarvy with two others, although the theatre had no permeant home. As a producer he learned the practical aspect of theatre, with which he was not happy so when he saw a Balinese drama at the French Colonial Exposition in Paris which was the ideal that he had been searching for because it showed a spectacle and dance.

He was also a theoretician and in 1932-1933 wrote the  Manifestos of the Theatre of Cruelty which is the basis for much of his style of theatre. The first play that he wrote Les Cenci (The Cenci) was a complete failure and sent him to Mexico in 1930. On his return to Paris, he was engaged and had tried to end his drug addiction. In a lecture in Brussels in 1937 he was completely out of control. Similarly, in Ireland in the autumn of the same year he was declared mentally unfit and send back to France in a straight jacket. During this time, Artaud wrote The Theatre and its Double. After this, Artaud was diagnosed as a schizophrenic and spent the following nine years in various mental institutions and eventually died of cancer in 1948.

Despite having no success with his endeavors and his reputation being wholly based on his critical work, he still became a strong influence. He said that in theatre, the spectacle should play the main role and made producers more aware of their elaborate sets, movement, and attention to myth.

Visual Poetry - Instead of words, Artaud used stylised movement, gesture, dance, music, and sound effects to communicate with the audience.

Dream World - Combined with visual poetry, Artaud used symbolic props and costumes in order to affect the audience's emotion and subconscious.

Assaulting the Audience - Lights, music, sound, and images were used to shock and confront the audience; this has been made easier in recent years due to the development of technology.

Involving the Audience - The action would take place around the audience which would allow them to be closer and more a part of the action; in some Artaud inspired pieces (and in my GCSE Drama devised piece) actors can go into the audience in order to affect them emotionally.

Deliberate Cruelty - This is an attack on the audience's emotions and senses in a deliberate attempt designed to shock and total involve the audience.

In order for us to understand and get used to the Artaudian style, we were led in a workshop which covered Artaud's main concepts and ideas. I think that this enabled me to get a better grasp on Artaud's style which I feel I wasn't able to grasp at a lower level (GCSE).

Invisible Grid

On the ground was an invisible grid which had lines on it. Using the whole of the space, we walked around it using the lines and when we wanted to change direction we had to turn at a 90 degree angle sharply. We did this for a while at around an average walking pace. Then music was turned on; as the music got louder or quieter, we sped up or slowed down depending on the volume whilst still trying to keep our actions sharp and maintaining concentration. This activity was done to show Artaud's method of having the actor have control over their body and using visual poetry such as stylised movement. I found this quite hard to do, especially as we sped up because my turns became less sharp. This was possibly because I was thinking over the action rather than doing the activity. I also found it hard when coming towards another person because my immediate reaction was to flinch and turn away.

Slow Motion Tennis

I found this activity much easier to do because of the amount of exaggeration that went into it. We 'played' a game of tennis in slow motion using our bodies and facial expressions to show what emotion the tennis player could be feeling. The over use of facial expressions made the activity more comedic (as well as being quite painful on the muscles as I hadn't used them before in that way) which I found quite easy to achieve due to previous 'training' in musical theatre.

Silent Argument

I also found this activity much easier to do. Despite much of the rest of the class talking about what their argument was going to be about, myself and Rachel found it easier to improvise what ours was about. Rather than both of us being mad at the other like what I think most of the class did, we chose that Rachel was the one to be mad at me and I was trying to understand what I had done wrong. In this sense, it was easy to use Stanislavski methods such as the magic 'if' and emotional memory so that we could get into the roles of the characters we had created. I thought that the silence of the scene created more tension between our characters rather than when we added one word for each of our characters to repeat - my word was please and Rachel's word was out. When the words were spoken it released some of the tension within the mini scene and suggested that we were about to come down from the climax of the scene. This again showed control of the body and mind and usage of the body over the mind to portray a scene as we had to over exaggerate our movements and facial expressions.

Fantasy Journey

As a group of four we went on a fantasy journey through a fridge and into the magical land inside of the fridge. We had to over exaggerate our movements and facial expressions again which made the piece both comedic and disturbing due to the context of what we were doing. Additionally, we were told to sacrifice someone to the monster hiding in the fridge which brought again an element discomfort and disgust despite the exaggeration being comedic. Additionally, we created our own soundscape with shouting and some screaming in the activity which allowed for additional Artaudian technique.

Quick Depictions

Staying on the somewhat uncomfortable route, we then personified objects such as a washing machine and sausages on the grill. Most of the objects were screaming which although was comedic had uncomfortable undertones and could make an audience member confront themselves as to how they treat this object. We further enhanced this by creating a mini scene in a factory where we boxed up something along a conveyer belt. This again was quite disturbing yet comedic.

Ritual

By ourselves we were told to reenact something that we do everyday. For me, I chose running from the tram to the bus in the morning and made four distinct sections to my movements. I then joined Izzy where we adopted each others movements and made them into a mini routine/scene with a transition in between them. We then joined Kathryn and Hannah 1 where we adapted each of our routines so that we could fit into each of them. We adapted them by changing some of the moves and by doing this, it made the movements more abstract which is needed in an Artaudian style piece to confuse the audience. I think that we made our routine far too abstract, so much so that in some parts it was hard to see what our additional ideas had been, however, for some parts such as the pressing of each others cheeks, it worked well especially with the background music and the lighting.

 

Anatomy of a Suicide - Part 8

Lesson: 19th, 23rd, and 26th October 2017

During these three lessons, we worked on the second scene with Bonnie and Jo and on combining the other two scenes (of Anna and Carol) that happen at the same time as this scene.

Before this we consolidated our learning by creating freeze frames that summed up Carol and John's relationship. One was done in the style of Brecht and the other in the style of Stanislavski. I found the Stanislavski freeze frame harder to create because of the lack of surrealism that could be brought to the freeze frame. However, in some ways, the use of given circumstances (another Stanislavski method) made it easier to evaluate Carol and John's relationship. This was helped by the creation of the given circumstance timelines that I made, as shown on my previous Anatomy of a Suicide blog. I found the Brecht freeze frame easier to create because we could present parts, archetypes, such as emotions rather than having to be a character within the piece which allowed for use of all the actors and to have each of them have some form of symbolism. In the Stanislavski freeze frame, we made the scene where John could potentially be looking over Carol in the hospital where there could potentially be medical staff checking over her. This would show John's despair at his wife being unconscious and would allow him to show his emotions more, something which he tries to hide in the first scene of the play because of him having to be strong and the stereotypical 'man' in the situation. In the Brecht scene we had Carol and John stood in the middle, quite close together with carol holding their baby, Anna. We had an older Anna sat in the audience to show interaction with the audience and to show that Carol and John's actions would have an effect further down the line in their daughter, and two other actors in front of Carol and John who were gripping onto them to show how their past could affect their reactions to each other and to show that they were 'drowning' in their own emotions and thoughts, which ultimately destroy their relationship. We also had Carol staring into the audience to show how detached she was from the birth of her child and to show that she was still making the decision as to whether to leave and commit suicide or to stay with Anna. We had John staring at Anna in Carol's arms to show that he already loves Anna. We decided to use the character of Anna to show Carol and John's relationship because she is an integral part to keeping them together, and to keeping Carol alive.

After this, we were shown monochrome images of a play called Mother Courage and Her Children which was written by Brecht. At the time we didn't know what the play was about or that it was written by Brecht and were asked to decide whether they were from a Brecht style play or Stanislavski style play. For some of the images I was correct in confirming that they were from a Brecht style play but for other images I thought they were from a Stanislavski style play. I think that this shows how similar some of the techniques of Brecht and Stanislavski are which I didn't realise until I saw these images. In my opinion, I think Anatomy of a Suicide is a combination of both styles of practitioner. This is because there can be the use of given circumstances throughout and the actor can use things such as the magic 'if' and emotional memory to portray the emotion needed in some of the scenes within the play. Moreover, as the play has three scenes playing simultaneously throughout, the play is constantly distancing the audience from some of the action within each section.

Using the above script, we then got into same sex partners in order to portray Bonnie and Jo. Although me and my partner, Alex, remembered all the lines, I felt, especially towards the end of the rehearsal process, that we had cast the roles incorrectly. I feel that I should have played as Jo because I have a wider range of vocal tones and am much more enthusiastic as an actor, which matches Jo's personality, whereas Alex has a more subdued vocal tone which would have allowed her to access the more subdued personality of Bonnie. Henceforth, this made the tone of the scene completely different from what it was meant to be like and almost seemed to change the characters personalities. I portrayed Bonnie as quite anxious which doesn't suit her personality at all. Additionally, Alex wasn't as enthusiastic at playing Jo as she should have been which didn't suit Jo's personality. Below is a more accurate representation of Bonnie and Jo's relationship by Izzy and Kathryn (I think that their relationship is pretty much summed up in the analysis of the script above):



Izzy gives a great representation of Jo. She is enthusiastic and the audience can clearly see that she is interested in Bonnie whilst trying to avoid the awkwardness of their last encounter which was a one night stand. Both of them allow for this awkwardness to be seen by leaving large gaps of silence between each part of speech which as well as making the scene awkward, leave space for the other parts of speech that are said in the other scenes which are going on at the same time as this one. Kathryn gives a great representation of Bonnie by lowering her head and constantly looking away which signal to the audience how disinterested Bonnie is in Jo. These two opposing opinions on each other allow more awkwardness that the audience can see as the two are seemingly not on the same page on their feelings for each other. This is potentially because Bonnie has trouble with sharing her emotions due to a lack of motherly love from Anna as Anna committed suicide while Bonnie was around 6 months old (as babies have to be in a Moses Basket up until around 6 months old). 

After this, we were told to go over the scene with Bonnie and Jo in, and mark on the script how long the gaps are between each line in order to give time for other lines in the Carol and Dave scene, and Anna and John scene. I found this initially quite easy to do because there were no other voices saying anything, which allowed for the silences to be long enough to feel awkward for the actors d most importantly for the audience. But as we began to add in more voices and the additional scenes, it became more confusing as to when to say the lines, than when it was with two actors having a prolonged silence. However, as the additional scenes were added, it gave a different atmosphere for the audience watching the scene as many of the lines overlapped and could relate to each scene.

In the final lesson, we created the first staging of the first page of this scene. The initial ideas for the staging is that each time frame will have one third of the stage and that the three women won't move from their section of the time frame. On the front of the stage there will be a time stamp for each scene which will either be projected onto the front of the stage area or somehow electronically put into the set. This will allow the audience to see the differences between each scene and make them understand when each scene is set without having the characters outright tell the audience. There will also be doors so that the stage crew and actors can access the wings, allowing props to be brought on and off the stage at specific points. The floor will also be different in each section for the different lineations. The will also be a light fitting between each scene to further split up the scenes. This, however, is subject to change.




Carol and Dave

In this scene, a pregnant Carol is being shown around a house by an estate agent, Dave. The house is in the middle of nowhere in the countryside and is seemingly a nice place to live. This is very significant because this is the family home that is mentioned in each of the stories and plays a major part in each of the stories. Carol initially liked the place because of its openness - it seems warm and nice. There could be soft sunlight pouring in from the window that Carol looks out of at the start of the scene. This is significant because Carol is looking out at the fields and plum trees that feature prominently in the other stories - Bonnie even says that her grandmother apparently bought the house because of the plum trees - and Carol loves to go walking which is probably why she bought the house in the first place; the garden and outside is more important than the house for her because she can get away for longer and feel more free. As Dave is an estate agent, the audience would expect him to lie to sell the house, but Dave here seems as though he actually likes the house. He also seems to have an element of respect for Carol as she is a middle class pregnant woman, and also because she seems largely interested in buying the house. At the beginning of this scene, Dave hangs back a bit, allowing Carol to investigate and look at the house and also because he wants her to say something regarding the house. Carol seemingly doesn't quite know what to say and appears to say her first line for Dave to which Dave responds quite amicably which creates the moment of orientation where the audience understand that Dave is an estate agent due to the Carol's first line. Much like the other scenes, this scene is also awkward as the two characters don't know each other that well which is why Carol says that first line as that's what she's socially supposed to say.

Anna and John

In this scene, John visits Anna in rehab, the first time he's seen her since she tried to have sex with him for drugs. John is Carol's husband, Anna's father, and Bonnie's grandfather, so by having him on stage it ties the scenes on stage together and the women together - this is the audience's first inclination that the three women are related, although they may not realise this. It is most probable that the audience may focus on Anna's and John's scene because they are in the middle of the stage and in most of the audience's eyesight. this makes John's presence much more significant due to his relation to all three women and by him being in the centre. The two of them are in Anna's room at the rehab centre and so she probably would have made the place her own. The rehab programme that Anna is on is a residential rehab that is run over 90 days - she is 12 days off finishing the 90 days - and is where someone will end up if lots of other programmes have failed to help you; this is way down on the list of things you try and do to recover from your addiction. Anna is as sober/straight out as she has been in years which would make John very emotional at how much she has come on since the last time he saw her. Anna is sat down which suggests she is more comfortable in being in the rehab clinic than John is, probably because she has been in there for 78 days already and does feel genuinely comfortable there. However, this scene would still be awkward due to the last time that the two had seen each other. The line "Are you happy now?" from Anna, her first line in this scene, could mean many different things. Firstly, it could mean that she's asking John if he's that she's now better and seems as though she's being genuine due to her following line. It could also mean that she's asking John if he's feeling better and if he's recovered from seeing his daughter in a bad state. This is why he may seem immensely emotional as he's standing in the space with the balloon which creates the moment of orientation.  This is most probably why he doesn't answer her initially because he's drinking in her wellness.

Bonnie and Jo

Much like the two above scenes, this scene is also awkward. There wasn't that much movement in this scene because Bonnie is trying to get over the shock of Jo appearing and Jo is trying to impress Bonnie with the fish. This is why they are facing each other. They are also facing each other and are quite close together because they are stood in a hallway or living room. During this small performance of the scene, I played Jo and felt much more comfortable within the role and felt that I could act as Jo more effectively than I had been previously been playing Bonnie.

Anatomy of a Suicide - Part 7

Lesson: 16th October 2017

During this lesson, we worked on the given circumstances of each character. Below are timelines of the three main women in Anatomy of a Suicide.

Carol

Anna

 Bonnie

Family Tree

I decided to create a family tree so that I'd know how each character fits into the story and who they interact with.

Anatomy of a Suicide - Part 6

Lesson: 16th October 2017

During this lesson we did prop work around Anatomy of a Suicide. In the play, props are brought on by other actors within the scene and have to be brought on from separate sides of the stage. This creates a chaos onstage that isn't actually chaos but well rehearsed movements that allow props to be brought onstage effectively. It also adds a sense that the people carrying the props - the other actors, excluding Carol, Anna, and Bonnie - are more in control of the story and to some extent themselves. This can be shown because both Carol and Anna eventually lose themselves after the birth of their respective daughters. In our lesson, we made three simple freeze frames showing a day at school with three actors whilst the other people moved props around the stage and in some cases moved the actor themselves.

Before we made the freeze frames we were told to use as many props as possible which would help us when the time came to actually move the props on and off stage as there was more things for the people with the props to do. Our initial freeze frames showed a teacher teaching a class (with another actor being the inanimate whiteboard); a person being attacked/bullied by multiple people (with another actor being the inanimate bus shelter roof); and students taking an exam (with another actor as the inanimate clock). We chose to do these because they resembled a school life easily with exams being the 'be all and end all' for students with bullying being thrown into the mix.

After this, we had to reduce the actors in the scene to three. This relates to Anatomy of a Suicide because there are three main actresses who would be handed props and have them taken away much like how this scene played out. It was also said that the actors can't move the props themselves and would have to have them taken away, taken off stage and brought back on stage by a different stage hand. Additionally, the props couldn't be taken off one actor and given to another in one action, they had to be brought offstage and given to the actor by a different stage hand. Moreover, the props couldn't be brought on twice from the same side, for example left left. This made the scene even more difficult because bringing on and taking off each prop had to be removed/brought on in a specific order and often we found that we ended up on the wrong side of the stage to bring the prop on. At one point in the video below, all four stage hands ended up on the same side of the stage which slowed the pace of the piece exponentially.



During the first part of the piece, it is clear that all stage hands knew what they were doing, even if the table did fall over at one point which was quickly sorted out by Marlon (even though he was an actor). In addition, the removal/bringing on of the white screen was done well each time we used it, even to the point of where Joel didn't have to move for the white screen to be collected. However, as the piece progressed, it became evidentially clear that we didn't know which stage hand was supposed to collect/drop off each prop. This became clear towards the end when I was left onstage with the risers that no one helped me to remove from the stage. In order for this to be solved communication between each other as to who would bring the props on should be greater. Additionally, we should have written down the order of the props as to how they were taken off and brought on and who was doing so, so that the pace would improve and we would feel more confident in our actions.

When we finally perform the play, we will have rehearsed each part fully so will know who brings which prop on when which would improve the pace and make the performance more effective. To do this, we should write down our cues to bring each prop on so that stage hands know what props should be where, and make sure they're on the correct side of the stage.

Five Truths - National Theatre

Extra Research

What is the National Theatre?

The National Theatre is a public funded theatre that supports new talent. It was originally based in the Old Vic Theatre, London, whilst the current theatres that it currently 'lives' in were being built. It tours across the UK and provides performances of plays/musicals written by Shakespeare, international classical drama writers, and contemporary playwrights. Additionally, it provides National Theatre Live which is where performances of National Theatre productions are broadcast to cinemas across the UK and around the world; the first National Theatre Live was in 2009. The calls for a National Theatre date as far back as 1847 where there seemed to be a 'star' system in the theatre industry in Britain. Finally, on October 22nd 1963, the National Theatre opened with a production of Hamlet. The company houses three separate theatres: Olivier Theatre, named after Laurence Olivier, the first artistic director; Lyttelton Theatre, named after Oliver Lyttelton, the first board chairman; and Dorfman Theatre, named after Lloyd Dorfman. There was also a Temporary Theatre from April 2013 to May 2016.

The Five Truths Series

The National Theatre created the Five Truths Series which was a series in which a scene from Hamlet and the character Ophelia are examined. They are presented in five different ways in the style of five different theatre practitioners: Stanislavski, Brecht, Artaud, Grotowski, and Brook.

Stanislavski

In my opinion, I think that this version of the piece was the most boring one, especially compared to the more interesting and genuinely frightening versions such as the Artaud inspired one. It was very naturalistic, which could be used to describe Stanislavski's style of theatre, and although there seemed to be vast amounts of emotion that Ophelia had about the deaths of her potential husband and her father but not as much compared with that of the Grotowski version. This piece did show the emotion that would be needed to become fully immersed in the character and it seems as though the actress may have thought about the Magic If which is why she seems so affected by the Hamlet's death.

Brecht

The Brecht piece was much more interesting to watch than the Stanislavski piece. To me, I think that this piece was more compelling to watch due to Ophelia's lesser reaction to Hamlet's death which showed her to be distancing the audience - the Verfremdungseffekt - and also suggests that the actress is presenting an archetype rather than immersing herself into the character. Additionally, Ophelia shows less emotion throughout the piece than what is shown in the Stanislavski and the Grotowski pieces, especially when she commits suicide at the end. This would allow the audience to think about the reasons why she committed suicide, rather than the emotional needs - theatre is for "the brain not the heart".

Artaud

Artaud was a French dramatist who worked at around the same time as Brecht. He, however, took a different route to Brecht, and in some ways was somewhat similar to Stanislavski, because he wanted the audience to become emotional when watching a piece, although, Artaud wanted the audience to look into their fears, rather than get lost into the piece that they were watching. Artaud presented the Theatre of Cruelty where he wanted the audience to experience discomfort/confusion about the piece that they were watching. In many of Artaud's pieces, there was no storyline, but rather a theme that ran throughout, which is similar to the political themes presented in Brechtian theatre. His pieces would have minimal dialogue, instead animalistic noises - such as grunts and screams - were used to present the story. He was heavily influenced by surrealism due to a life long addiction to opiates such as heroin. Additionally, he had spells inside mental institutions which also influenced his work.

Visual Poetry - Instead of words, Artaud used stylised movement, gesture, dance, music, and sound effects to communicate with the audience.

Dream World - Combined with visual poetry, Artaud used symbolic props and costumes in order to affect the audience's emotion and subconscious.

Assaulting the Audience - Lights, music, sound, and images were used to shock and confront the audience; this has been made easier in recent years due to the development of technology.

Involving the Audience - The action would take place around the audience which would allow them to be closer and more a part of the action; in some Artaud inspired pieces (and in my GCSE Drama devised piece) actors can go into the audience in order to affect them emotionally.

Deliberate Cruelty - This is an attack on the audience's emotions and senses in a deliberate attempt designed to shock and total involve the audience.

This version of the scene from Hamlet was again exciting and interesting to watch. There was a complete change of props from the previous two pieces, including a goldfish bowl from which the camera was placed which I thought was an effective way of getting the audience directly involved with the action. For the first few minutes of the piece there were distorted sounds and images on screen where the sounds were amplified. At this point the actress was making the form of words with her mouth but wasn't actually speaking, so when she began to speak I got shivers from how distorted and unexpected her voice was. I thought this piece was the most effective way of showing Ophelia's pain because I thought the distortions could resemble her emotional pain and may also show the state of her mind which gives a clearer reason to her death - which seemed vastly more dramatic than in the other pieces. This piece also attacked the audience's senses (and made my younger brother scared when I watched it in the room with him!) which directly involved the audience.

Grotowski

Grotowski was a Polish dramatist who thought that theatre had become too infected with extravagant costume, make up, acting and staging. The only thing, to him, that was required for a performance was the actors themselves and that the relationship between the actor and the audience was key and wanted to eliminate unnecessary movement. He wanted audiences to experience truths about human experience through watching actors access their own inner truth. He did this by training actors to be stripped away of pre-conceived ideas and masks that would aid them in their acting. Additionally, he trained actors to have supreme power over their mental and physical state and wanted an actor's voice and body to be mirrored by the text.

This version of the scene was again interesting to watch, however, the first time I watched it (without researching the practitioner) I found the piece confusing which may have affected my view on the piece. Much like Artaud, the piece was far more dramatic in showing Ophelia's mental state, especially at the beginning where Ophelia seemed to be losing herself in her grief. Her voice and body at this point mirror the text and suggest that she is very affected by the prior events. Additionally, this piece was effective because there was less of a build up to her death in the beginning, which for me was easier to watch because it was less boring for the audience. There were fewer props and less of a focus on hair and make up which allows the audience to focus on the person rather than on what's around them which sticks to Grotowski's style of theatre.

Brook

Brook is an English theatre and film director who was inspired by Artaud, Brecht, and Grotowski. He has directed a lot of Shakespeare with the Royal Shakespeare Company. He wants to liberate actors from methods and wants to break down the classic conventions of theatre. He called these classic conventions 'Deadly Theatre'. He also coined terms such as 'Holy Theatre' (seeks out spiritual/ritualistic nature of theatre) and 'Rough Theatre' (popular without pretentions to art). His personal theatre was 'Immediate Theatre' which is the notion of experimental theatre but is a pretty useless theory.

I found this version of the piece quite boring to watch as the tone stayed relatively the same throughout and didn't really present Ophelia's emotions. However, it could be said that the tone of the piece shows how bad her mental state is because she hardly seems to be reacting. Despite this, I found it harder to connect with Ophelia in the piece than I had in others such as Artaud.

Brecht: Consolidation

Lesson: 12th October 2017

In order to consolidate our learning of Brecht and his ideas, we created a mind map (pictured below). The headings include:
- Works
- Links to Stanislavski
- Epic Theatre
- Backstory
- Influences

As a collective, we discovered far more about Brecht than we had before in smaller groups. We were able to see how and why Brecht created what he did and when he created it. In my opinion, if we had done this research at an earlier date, before we had created our performances, we would have had a better understanding on Brechtian techniques which would have made our performances better as a whole. By doing this, we gained a greater understanding of the techniques needed to make a better Brechtian performance.

In order to show this, we presented each topic in a Brechtian style through songs, dance, and dispassionate narration. Myself and Izzy used both a song (rap) and archetypes to present the links between Brecht and Stanislavski. We decided to do a rap battle because it showed both spass and archetypes well, as well as incorporating a song element to the piece.



In addition to this, other groups created:

- A song to show Brecht's influences and his works.
- A dance break to show epic theatre.
- A physical piece with dispassionate narration to show Brecht's backstory.

All of these created a spass element and also effectively showed Brechtian techniques whilst also being able to understand them more clearly.

Anatomy of a Suicide: Part 5

Lesson: 12th October 2017

Carol and John

During this lesson, we again focused on Carol and John and their relationship. In my opinion, their relationship is not an open one which is highlighted in the very first scene where it is clear that John doesn't know Carol's inner most thoughts at all and was completely taken by surprise by Carol's suicide attempt. It is clear that John feels somewhat guilty for not being there for Carol but still wants to support her. Below are three freeze frames and their transitions which were initially based upon Carol and John's relationship. However, before we performed it, we said that the piece was based upon the phrase "We said vows" which is said by John. I think this highlights John's despair and hurt towards Carol because the fact they married suggests that they should be open about everything which Carol clearly isn't due to her failed suicide. In my opinion I think that the succession of freeze frames suggest John's response to the line and his opinions on how the two ended up in the situation presented at the beginning of the piece.

This freeze frame initially was to show how John and Carol's relationship may have been at the beginning where they would have told each other everything that they're thinking about. This is shown by how tightly Carol and Peter (here played by Hannah and Peter) are hugging each other and that they can keep depressing thoughts at bay (shown by the rest of the group laid around them in a circle) by each others presence. However, with the emphasis put on the aforementioned line, it slightly changed the idea behind the freeze frame. It suggests at first that John's opinion on their relationship is very much the same as it was before, that they were initially very close in their marriage. However, as the people on the floor are gripped onto their legs, it suggests that Carol's bad thoughts are clinging on but, as their relationship (to John at least) seems strong, the thoughts are kept at bay, which is shown by the ring being lower than Carol and John. Additionally, the ring could symbolise a wedding ring and with people gripping onto the couple's leg it suggests that Carol maybe feel constrained by marriage due to these thoughts that she thinks she can't ever share with her husband.

Initially, this freeze frame showed how John appears to be bearing the brunt of the guilt in the relationship due to Carol's suicide. However, with the line change, it suggests that John is trying to hold Carol up throughout the marriage without even realising it. As Carol appears to be falling/sliding down John's back, this suggests that she's not in control of the situation which puts more pressure on John to heal the marriage, especially after Carol's suicide. Again, the other people within the freeze frame are either lifting Carol up on John's back even more, or are pressing John's head further down. This suggests that their marriage is faltering slightly due to Carol's invasive thoughts and due to her attempted suicide.

At first, this freeze frame was meant to show John's grief and despair at Carol's attempted suicide and the problems that it will cause for both of them. With John standing in front of Carol, it suggests that John is fully taking control of the situation but is also ashamed of what Carol has done. In this sense it is somewhat clear that John holds all the power in their marriage because it seems that Carol has given up on their vows and has broken them by trying to die - in essence, an escape clause from the marriage. In this sense, the 'old' Carol could be dead to John, replaced by a woman who he no longer thinks he understands.

Bonnie and Jo

In this lesson we also read the first scene in which Bonnie appears. Bonnie is the daughter of Anna and the granddaughter of Carol and it is clear to see some echoes of both Anna's and Carol's stories in Bonnie's throughout each scene. There are some major differences between Bonnie's first scene and the other two women's; for example, Bonnie is not the character who has most of the speech in this scene, instead this is given to Bonnie's future partner, Jo. This would suggest to the audience that Jo is the main character within this story, confirmed as Jo is the character who's injured within this scene and not Bonnie. Additionally, Bonnie begins the scene by saying a variation of "I'm sorry" which is how both Anna and Carol had begun their scenes. This would signal to the audience that Bonnie is the main character within this story, but this may be missed due to Jo's overwhelming speech.

I think that the audience would warm to Jo more because she shows more embarrassment at the situation than Bonnie does, most probably because Bonnie is a doctor and sees this on a daily basis. This could make the audience want Jo to be the main character within this story because Jo has allowed more of her character to be seen and more of her life (her given circumstances). In contrast, Bonnie is quite subdued about her family life, possibly because of her mother's suicide and of her slightly dysfunctional family, which would make the audience trust her less than Jo.

Whilst this scene is happening, there are two other scenes also occurring on stage. In Carol's scene, Carol is talking to a child, Daisy, about her attempted suicide - Daisy is being unsupportive throughout and telling Carol about what other members of Carol think about her. In Anna's scene, Anna is taking heroin; both of which juxtapose the humour in Bonnie's scene by being slightly more serious.

Anatomy of a Suicide: Part 4

Lesson: 9th October 2017

In this lesson, we read the second scene of Anatomy of a Suicide and focused on Anna's scene with Dan. Initially, I found the scene funny, especially as Anna's drunken/high state became more known, especially with the things she was saying to Dan such as mentioning the aquarium. However, as the scene developed, I began to see that Anna was immensely troubled (most probably to do with her mother's - Carol - own suicide when Anna was sixteen) especially towards the end of the scene when she began to echo Carol slightly. My first thought of what might have happened between the two is that Anna and Dan had been close friends, potentially lovers, and had fallen out over Anna having sex with Dan's fifteen year old brother. Additionally, I thought that Dan had provided Anna with a place to stay whilst she recovered from a drug addiction, that she never really overcame, hence why she is high in this scene. As Dan mentioned that Anna had sex with his brother "six months ago", I can assume that this is the last time when the two had met before this scene which is why Dan seems so annoyed with Anna. The class consensus was very similar, with Dan and Anna having been in a relationship that abruptly ended when Anna had had sex with Dan's brother.

After reading this scene, we got into pairs, where one person out of the pair had been given a stick and was told to be really drunk whilst trying to give the stick back to their partner, who they believed owned the stick, who they hadn't seen in six months after a pretty bad break up. This links to Anna and Dan's scene because Anna turns up drunk/high after not seeing Dan for six months. We did this to get a better grasp on the symptoms of being drunk so that whilst performing this scene, we could get a better grasp on Anna's character. Additionally, the person with the stick was told that they were trying to not act drunk whilst drunk which links to this scene because Anna is desperately trying not to seem drunk/high. This allowed us to use Stanislavski's the "Magic If".

Below is some analysis of the scene, most prominently the extract that myself and Marlon performed to the class:




Below is the performance of the above script:





There are many positives about this piece. During the first 19 seconds the audience are allowed to see how Dan and Anna react initially to one another. For example, despite the history that Dan has with Anna, Marlon, as Dan, remains quite calm which could be due to Dan's role as a doctor so he wouldn't want to alarm the other patients and is also in a hospital environment so would want to remain professional. This professionalism is counter acted by Anna whereby I portrayed her as rocking slightly as drunk people usually can't keep still and are generally quite loud. This shouting/slurring of my words allowed the audience to see the state that Anna was in and that despite this, she was trying to act like she wasn't at all drunk. This allowed for some comedic moments within the piece. In addition to this, when Dan starts telling Anna about the things that she has stolen, I changed my tone to a defensive one because drunk/high people stereotypically lie about things that they have done so would get defensive especially if it was something bad.

 At 0.37, I went towards Marlon and emphasised the line that I said. This was to show that maybe Anna is trying, quite unsuccessfully, to make Dan jealous about her previous sexual escapades due to their past relationship. However, as Dan seems unimpressed by the state Anna is in, he would most likely pity her for making a move on him. Marlon also showed that Dan pitied Anna at 0.54 - "I've seen a lot of your vagina" - because of his inability to say the word. It also showed how awkward Dan felt about the situation, that Anna simply did not feel or pick up on. My response to this line was to look down which showed that Anna was very disbelieving about the aforementioned situation or she is very impressed/amused by Dan's reaction.

At 1.06 I started to drift away and focus on one part of Marlon during his speech about how Dan found Anna with his brother. This was to show that she wasn't listening to what Dan had to say further as she was focused on the line "When you come out of all of this" and also showed that her head was "swimmy" as she mentions later in the scene. At 1.23 during the "Head's a bit swimmy" line, I raised my hand to my head. This brought the audience's attention back to Anna's head injury which is mentioned in the stage directions at the beginning of the scene. This also suggests to the audience that Anna is seeing/feeling the head injury for the first time and also may be the cause as to why her head is swimmy in the first place, in addition to the alcohol and drugs. However, this may have to be changed because her head may have been sorted by Dan earlier in the scene which some of the other pairs showed.

There are also some negatives within this scene. Within the first few seconds of the piece Marlon shouted "And you f****d my brother". In my opinion, I doubt that Dan would shout in a hospital, his place of work, because it would seem largely unprofessional. However, this is not without reason because Dan may be annoyed that Anna has come into the hospital due to her own behaviour whilst Dan is having to deal with other patients who are sick of something that is not their fault. In addition to this, Marlon shouts "And I don't live on a boat" at 0.43 - the angry retort worked well but he could have simply kept the angry tone which may have been more effective. Moreover, when I said "No. No I didn't" at 0.11 and 0.31, they sounded very similar to one another which reduced variation to the audience. Instead of using the same defensive tone, I could have varied both the tone and the pace of the lines to make them different to one another.

After this, we read the remainder of the scene which involved Carol and John who would speak at relatively around the same time and would say some of the same lines at the same time as Anna and Dan. Below is the ending to this scene with all the same lines said at the same time underlined in pink. I think that this is going to be one of the most challenging aspects of the piece because the actors will need to learn both parts so that they know where their own lines fall between the gaps in the other scene playing opposite them.

Brecht - Part 4: Final Performance

Lesson: 5th October 2017

We performed our final Brecht piece in this lesson, with around an additional half an hour rehearsal time before we performed the piece. We used this time to further refine the piece and add titles to each section of the performance. We did this firstly to again remind the audience that they are watching a performance, and also to easily guide the audience through the piece so that they didn't get confused about what scene transitioned into another. Below is a video of our final performance:



The timings for each scene are as follows:

Scene 1 - News Report: 0.00 - 0.50
Scene 2 - Dance Break: 0.51 - 1.44
Scene 3 - The Point: 1.5 - 2.52
Scene 4 - Trump: 2.53 - 4.35
Scene 5 - News Report: 4.36 - 4.55

Scene 1 - News Report

This scene is a weather report of the different kinds of weather that the world is facing on a daily basis.

At around four seconds into the piece we said the title of the scene - mentioned above - and counted down to when the scene was about to begin. This allowed for the audience to understand what the scene was based around and also enable them to understand what was going on during the scene and why we were doing it. It also allows the scenes to be split up accordingly and make it easier to define what each scene is. This shows an episodic structure as the piece runs in chronological order (from the report, to the hurricane, to the aftermath) which is a Brechtian technique.

At around ten seconds into the piece it is clear to see where the improvements have been made from our first full run through in front of an audience. The pace is a lot quicker as we get into the main body of the piece at an earlier time than when we did with the previous performance. This was so this first scene didn't drag on for too long and allowed the audience to see what the main point of our piece was a lot quicker instead of going through fifty seconds of irrelevant material. Another improvement from the last performance is that we all said "The weather forecast" at the same time which firstly allowed the audience to understand what we were saying and again improved the pace. This also allowed for chorus, another Brechtian technique, to be used within the piece. In addition to this, we also created spass within the first ten seconds through the exaggeration of camera angles and how the lines were split up. This suggests that the Reporters don't care about the report and are trying to get their lines out as quickly as possible.

At 17 seconds into the piece, our first multi role begins to emerge for myself, Izzy, and Maya. While Alex and Lauren were speaking, we changed our placards from Reporter/Cameraman to Wind/Sun/Rain. Multi- role is a much needed aspect of a Brechtian piece and by allowing multi-role within the first scene, it allowed the audience to see that this was a Brechtian based performance. This also allows for a quicker pace as we weren't waiting for people to change their placards; additionally this allows for the changing of the placards to be more obvious which was an improvement that I suggested in a previous blog. The lines that Alex and Lauren were quite satirical which creates spass e.g. "S****y Britain" which is quite truthful to what the weather is usually like in Britain which the audience, as they are from Britain, would be fully aware of. These lines also present the world issue somewhat, as the world issue is about climate change which has connotations with the weather.

At 23 seconds I break the fourth wall by directly communicating with the audience by asking them where Britain is. This again creates spass because it's ironic for a weather type to not know where the place is where they should be over. The wind could be over Britain because of the hurricane blowing over from America, but as I completely miss where Britain is on the map, this interpretation may not be valid. The weather types are also sarcastic towards the weather reporters. At around this mark, the weather archetypes are greatly exaggerated because we are meant to be presenting a part, not being a part and by doing this, it allows the audience that they are watching a performance and also distances them slightly - creating the Verfremdungseffekt. This was also enhanced by the use of placards.

 At 44 seconds we introduce part of the world issue - Hurricane Irma. This allows the audience to see where the performance may be heading which captures Brecht's thoughts that theatre should be for the brain and not for the heart. This turns the scene vaguely serious, however, this is immediately juxtaposed by the line "What kind of a f*****g name is Hurricane Irma?" which allowed the audience to see that the piece is a performance, and not real life as well as breaking the fourth wall somewhat and producing more spass about the issue. This also shows the technique of chorus again.

There were many positives in this scene such as the clearly defined title and the improvement in pace. We also immediately used many Brechtian techniques which would allow a different audience to discover that the piece was Brecht inspired. However, there were negatives about the piece as well, including the slower pace from 0.30 to 0.41. In order to rectify this, the Reporters could have said their lines a little closer together so that the overall pace could improve.

Another improvement from the last full performance that was recorded in the removal of the transition from Scene 1 into Scene 2. Previously, the transition slowed down pace but with the removal of this transition, the performance flowed more successfully. Additionally, this transition was not clearly choreographed but was to show the chaos of the hurricane. Instead of the transition showing the chaos of the hurricane, I think the following scene better shows the chaos and doesn't involve any fabrics which made the transition look messy and awkward.

Scene 2 - Dance Break

This entire scene is a Brechtian technique as Brecht often used dance breaks to break up the seriousness of the piece and to break up action. This was to remind the audience that they're watching a performance and to slightly distance the audience. I think that our dance piece effectively reminded the audience that they were watching a piece of theatre because people in real life don't usually reenact a hurricane through dance, or break into a dance number in general.

Again, we used a title for this scene for the same aforementioned reasons in Scene 1. At 1.23, spass is again presented by the multiple dies, followed by jazz hands, followed by multiples dies again. The multiples dies symbolise the multiple deaths that the hurricane has caused and could cause the audience to become quite emotional. But as the word die is shouted and this part of the sequence is immediately followed by jazz hands, it juxtaposes the seriousness of the scene and reminds the audience that they are watching a performance. In addition to this, the two lifts within the piece suggest to me of how people and things may have been thrown around during the hurricane due to the force of the wind.

There were many positives about this scene because we all knew what we were doing within the scene. Moreover we were all relatively in sync and the majority of the actions were greatly exaggerated. From my knowledge, everything within the scene went correctly. To improve, we could have made the sequence slightly longer with a few more lifts to symbolise a higher amount of devastation that the hurricane has caused.


Scene 3 - The Point

This scene shows the world issue and allows the audience an insight to what people who have been affected by the hurricane might be thinking about. I wrote the script to this scene with the intention of gaining an emotional response from the audience which would then be immediately contrasted by the performance of Trump. I didn't name any of the characters because I wanted the people to remain anonymous to enhance how much more important Trump thinks he is; it also represents that the devastation was so great, it affected so many people in the same way and in different ways. I thought it was important that we had a serious scene in the middle of the performance so that every other scene could gain a new meaning. It was also important for this scene to get a response from the audience which was then juxtaposed by Trump in order to distance the audience (Verfremdungseffekt) so that they could be reminded that this has happened but this piece is not the real events. The characters represented the three things that affected most people; the general devastation, the loved ones that have been lost, and the businesses that have been ruined. Throughout the scene, their own lines link back to what they've lost which enhance their loss and make it more real, initially, for the audience. Additionally, I had the characters say some lines at the same time so that they'd make more of an impact within the piece, especially the last line of the scene ("Climate change is killing us") which provides the audience with the world issue. The differing opinions of what has caused the hurricane is provided which also shows the differing opinions on climate change itself. Moreover, as we all looked at the audience while saying our speeches/lines, it half broke the fourth wall because we were telling them what has gone wrong and why it has gone wrong. This enabled the audience to understand our emotions a bit more. This scene also allowed for myself, Lauren, and Maya to multi-role.

At the beginning of this scene, we forgot to say the title like we had done for all the other scenes which would have provided the audience with an insight into what the scene was about. However, this mistake may have made more of an impact with the audience due to the unexpectedness of the scene. This may have symbolised how the strength and destruction of Hurricane Irma was largely unexpected, certainly by those who don't live in areas where hurricanes are common and don't know the amount of destruction that can evolve from the hurricane.

A negative for myself is that I didn't manage to say the first line in time with the others; "Everything is gone.". This may have reduced the impact of the line slightly but may have not been that noticeable. Moreover, we didn't say the final line in sync which again may have impacted the effect of the line on the audience. The line was intended to be said a bit slower than how it was said in the performance to allow for greater impact on the audience. As it was said quite fast, the impact was lost massively.

Scene 4: Trump

This scene shows an additional aftermath to the hurricane and shows the political spin on the piece, a technique that was used by Brecht in all of his own pieces, such as his take on Hitler's Rise To Power. It shows the current politics due to climate change. Donald Trump himself has made it clear that he didn't take the hurricane seriously by not providing that much aid to the parts of the country he now presides over that have been badly affected by the hurricane. Additionally, Trump has made his stance on climate change clear due to him pulling the US out of the Paris climate change which we hopefully captured in this piece. We highlight his opinion on climate change during his speech as he doesn't think it's real and pins the blame onto other people.

At the beginning of this scene, there seemed to be a pacing issue due to the rolling out of the black cloth that was rolled out for him to walk on. It seemed there was a lack of communication about who was going to pull the cloth out which is highlighted by four of us trying to roll out the cloth.

At 3.05 Trump interacts with audience which shows how important he thinks he is compared to everyone else hence why he high fives the audience. It also shows an exaggerated archetype of Trump, as does the make up that is applied on stage during the previous scene which shows that the piece has no illusions.

At 3.35 Trump says that "fake news" had said that everyone had been evacuated from the site of the hurricane. Not only does this suggest that Trump is blaming the USA's problems on fake news, it also shows that Trump doesn't know what's occurring in his own country. This is also very topical due to many claims of fake news that come from the US. We decided to include this because it is very topical and shows Trump's disdain towards the situation. It also shows spass towards the situation of the hurricane.

At 4.05, Trump again says something that is current and topical - "We need a wall." This shows Trump's plans to build a wall between Mexico and the USA which was one of his main plans/points during the run up to the US presidential election. We show spass in this section of the piece by changing placards to Wall which reminds the audience of the Verfremdungseffekt and that the piece is a performance. We decided to do this with people instead of using an actual wall because it shows that Trump would use anything to get his wall - even with using real people, suggesting the political side, again, to the performance. Trump literally breaks the fourth wall by stepping through the fake wall and talking to the audience when he has stepped through, which created spass. During his speech, he lists things that can't get through the wall such as "Blacks...Jews...Mexicans...the hurricane". This suggests that Trump is very racist and also allows the political element to break through again.

There were many positives to the overall scene. Trump perfectly captured spass as people laughed at him; this was because the audience may have been uncomfortable and awkward about what he was saying as it's what he says in real life, without thinking about how much of an impact it makes on those he is referencing. In this, we completely captured the political undertone that is needed in a Brechtian style performance. However, there were some negatives about this scene as we didn't use as much dispassionate narration as I would have hope. Trump only briefly mentioned the other people on stage and I would have felt that we would have covered this area if Trump had described the other people a bit more; although, the way he described other people, made the audience laugh and created more spass. On a more personal note, I kept smiling with laughter during most of Trump's speech which may have distracted the audience slightly. In the future, I will try and be more serious if I have to be during a funny scene.

Scene 5 - News Report

This is a very short scene to end the piece. It shows a circular order to the piece whereby it finishes where it started. We decided to do this because it makes the audience understand that the entire piece was a news report on the hurricane, people's reaction to the hurricane, and the political reaction to the hurricane. The short abrupt end to the piece leaves the audience thinking about their own stance on climate change and what politicians who rule them think. We also had a quick transition between this scene and the previous scene which greatly improved the pace. Additionally, Izzy had a clearly defined difference between her Trump voice and Cameraman voice.

Media/Technology

We had a projected world map on the floor of the stage area. This was used so that the weather could try and be over the area that was specified by the Reporter. It also shows that there were less illusions because the weather could directly 'affect' the area chosen. However, the map ended up being upside down due to a technology malfunction which meant that the projection was not as effective as it has been in previous performances.

We used music for the dance - the song is called Nominal, Everyday Anyone and was effective for the dance. We turned the music on ourselves so that there would be minimal/no illusions within the piece.

The lighting within the piece was used for a reason. The white light was used so that it appeared like the audience were looking through a phone screen because Izzy had 'recorded' the News Report scene with a phone. It also suggests an innocence for the people before the hurricane. The red light which created a red background represented the deaths that occurred during the hurricane and also the deceit of the politicians who were supposedly trying to help the situation.

Set


Brecht wanted a minimalistic and simple set which we used within our piece. We used the risers pictured because firstly it allowed the audience to see everyone during the first scene and secondly, provided levels so that Trump was on the top most level during his speech because it is clear that he feels as if he's the most important person in the room. The black cloth also suggested that Trump feels as though he is again more important.

Characters

The characters are assigned as follows:

Me: Reporter; Wind; #1; Wall
Izzy: Cameraman; Sun; Trump
Maya: Reporter; Rain; #3; Wall
Lauren: Reporter; #2; Wall
Alex: Reporter; Wall

Myself and Alex made placards - in the picture opposite - to show the difference between each character. Using placards is another Brechtian technique and were used throughout allowing the Brechtian style to be shown.

Overall Improvements

I feel like we should have used more dispassionate narration to create more spass within the piece and would additionally show Trump's disdain towards the hurricane. Moreover, we should have tried to use repetition so that we could foreshadow events within the piece. Finally, we should have thought more about matching our clothing and make up choices so that we could all be symbolically matching.

Anatomy of a Suicide: Part 3

Lesson: 5th October 2017

In this lesson, we read the first three pages of Anatomy of a Suicide and talked about what each section of the scene could mean with the underlying meaning and tone of each sentence could be. This relates to Stanislavski because he said that a character should have an objective behind each line and movement. Below is the analysis of the scene that we worked on with each character's objectives and aims as well as the given circumstance and moment of orientation:

Before we looked at the script, we got into pairs so that we could create a moment of orientation. One person would be apologetic and wanting forgiveness which in the above scene would represent Carol, and the other person would be angry/annoyed at the other person but would also show that they care which would represent John in the above scene. This allowed me to view the characters in a more in depth way, especially when we began to unpick the text and uncover what may have happened before the scene began (which is another part of the Stanislavski method).

After this and after reading the script initially, we rehearsed this scene in our pairs. At first, I felt like I performed the part of John with too much emotion; in my opinion, the emotion should only really show at two points within the scene: "They pumped your stomach." and "Your uncle" because they both directly relate to Carol's suicide attempt. It also shows that John is more affected than he lets on initially and shows that he does care about her, despite not listening to her answers in the first part of the scene. During the majority of the scene, I felt like I kept the tone of my voice the same which at first I thought was a good choice because it makes the lines said with emotion more prominent. However, when I performed the lines in this way, it felt that John didn't seem to care about Carol as much. In order for this interpretation of John to be accurate, the aforementioned lines should be emotional and additionally the other lines should be on different tones to show that John does care about her but is also trying to understand why Carol did what she did. One positive about my performance is that at the beginning of the scene where John seems to be rambling about Carol's 'hunger' I ran each line into each other which shows that John is trying to make sense of the situation but is not leaving any time for Carol to answer his questions (this is looked at in more depth on the pictures of the script above).