Assignment 1 - Researching Classical Plays - Entry 4: The Relevance Between Shakespearian And Contemporary Audience's

Comparing The Relevance Between Shakespearian And Contemporary Audience's

Understanding The Language:

Information about words Shakespeare invented found here: http://mentalfloss.com/article/48657/20-words-we-owe-william-shakespeare

Understanding Shakespearian English wasn't any trouble at all for audience's in the Elizabethan Era. Each person in those days would have spoken just the same as the actors on stage. Looking at the fact that Actors didn't have long to learn their lines for Shakespeare's plays (3-5 days max!), they would have had to know what each word in the script means, saying them as well in the right tone and general delivery. Although it was easy for the audience, there were times where Shakespeare had invented his own language with words such as:

• Addiction - First used in the play called 'Othello' by way of this quote: “It is Othello's pleasure, our noble and valiant general, that, upon certain tidings now arrived, importing the mere perdition of the Turkish fleet, every man put himself into triumph; some to dance, some to make bonfires, each man to what sport and revels his addiction leads him.” – Herald, Act 2 Scene 2
• Assassination - First used in the play called 'Macbeth' by way of this quote: “If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly: if the assassination could trammel up the consequence, and catch with his surcease success.” – Macbeth, Act 1 Scene 7
• Bedazzled - First used in the play called 'The Taming of the Shrew' by way of this quote: “Pardon, old father, my mistaking eyes, that have been so bedazzled with the sun that everything I look on seemeth green.” – Katherina, Act 4 Scene 5

For a modern audience, Shakespeare's relevance is the language his plays are written in. It's quite a hard and daunting task if you're reading one of his plays for the first time, and you're trying to make sense of it. But there are ways of getting around reading the script and looking up his language in a thesaurus. We have the modern technology of watching movie clips on the internet which feature thousands of adaptations of Shakespeare's plays, and just watching one will help you understand how the language should be spoken in the right context. By hearing and watching the actors as they are performing, we get a good sense of what the story in the play is trying to tell its audience. Over a course of time and practice, a modern day person and/or actor will be able to understand and use the language of Shakespeare in the right context with ease.

Which Character(s) Would Audience Members Relate To The Most?:

To start this section off, I want to talk about the more relatable characters of 'Much Ado About Nothing': Beatrice, Benedick, and Dogberry with his crew.

I believe the main reason why this play is so much more popular than most other Shakespeare plays is because of all the witty banter the audience, both Elizabethan and Modern, amuse themselves watching. Scenes such as Act 1 Scene 1 in the play, where we witness Beatrice and Benedick having a conversation filled with banter throughout. The audience would participate in this event, by siding with their gender against the other, a witty battle between man and woman to see who comes out on top.

Dogberry, as well as his crew, would also be popular and relatable with audience members because of his unintended humorous moments where he would, for example, say a line such as "Aspicious" when he was meant to say "Suspicious". Because of their lower status in society, yet the play uses quite formal words throughout, it's a funny and comedic moment to have for a character that can't use certain words properly. I have a clip in one of my earlier entries and I talk about this more there.

When watching the adaptation of 'Much Ado About Nothing' staring Catherine Tate and David Tennant, I couldn't wait for these 3 particular characters to come on stage. Not because they're famous, worldwide actors, but because they portray them so well. I loved the moments of banter between Beatrice and Benedick, there were some moments that looked quite awkward for the two, yet the actors retained that moment whilst the audience would laugh at them.

How Much Different Audience Members Would React To Certain Scenes:

There are scenes in the play where the actor would pause slightly between lines. This can be a stage method of making the audience laugh if they get what the character is talking about or just to make the monologue flow with efficiency. Here is one scene in-particular that I quite like featuring Benedick performing his monologue in Act 2 Scene 1 at the party: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNIQm7vEa2o&index=5&list=PLVKiCaVA-ouRLmb_UIla3rDGfUg6FrexS

Now this moment in the play is quite interesting when I start to think about this play being performed in Elizabethan times. The actor on stage in those days would have had to rush through the monologue otherwise the audience would get bored and just think the actor had forgotten his line if he did pause like David Tennant did in that clip. But because of how well he can pull it off, and how much more patient modern audiences have become, David Tennant had the ability to pull off things such as these pauses for his scene. Doing this as well as doing other amusing things such as facial expression, slight change of tone in his voice does also make you laugh. Actors in Elizabethan times, I think, may have been more blank faced in a way. They didn't have long to learn their lines each week for each performance, and I think the expressions would have came for later performances or maybe never at all.

There is also another scene that would have been taken into a different perspective from audience members, both Elizabethan and Modern: Act 4 Scene 1. In this scene, Claudio and Hero are about to married, events transpire, and then Hero faints with Claudio, Don Pedro, and Don John exiting the scene. After the characters left on stage talk for a little bit, the friar says this line:

"Pause awhile, and let my counsel sway you in this case. Your daughter here the princes left for dead; Let her awhile be secretly kept in, and publish it that she is dead indeed. Maintain a mourning ostentation, and on your family's old monument Hang mournful epitaphs and do all rites that appertain unto a burial."

After saying this line, the Friar performs quite a long piece of text which pretty much says that after he fakes Hero's death, the friar taunts Claudio implying that Claudio's words contributed, or maybe even caused, Hero to commit suicide, leaving Claudio feeling guilt and remorse for what he said.

After watching this scene, I felt as though I was emotionally affected for Claudio and the trauma and suffering he was going through after being told he was responsible for the love of his life's death and then to eventually find out that she was not dead at all.

It would be much different for a Shakespearian audience when compared to the modern as we have become desensitised to distress, heartbreak, trauma, suffering, pain, death, murder with the invention of electronic media in all of its forms. Examples include games, television, films/cinema. Younger people see these things and they do become desensitised because of it. Younger people would play violent games watching death and destruction happen all around them. And then, as they grow up, it lessens the impact on their behaviours towards death and destruction. When a disaster happens in the Modern Era, we are inundated with information surrounding the incident, which is transmitted to every conceivable electronic form of media and again in print form in term of newspapers. Shakespeare's audience would have less experience of this. They may have had little to no news of events occurring in the world, and anything that did happen, depending on where it did happen and the severity of it, it could take days to weeks to arrive elsewhere by form of a carrier pigeon or someone simply passing the message along.

Men Playing As Women!:

Of course, there is another thing about Shakespearian theatre. There is the fact that the roles of woman were played by men. During the Elizabethan Era, it was illegal for a woman to be performing on stage. Examples of this happening still occur today in many situations, and some of them don't have anything to do with performance. Take, for example, young woman with masculine features dressing up and doing things as boys. They do things this way for any sort of reason, they may not like their sexuality, they may be avoiding to be punished for their sexuality, it can also be a way of deceiving others. Things such as this happen in many modern productions such as 'She's the Man' (2006), Just One of the Guys (1985), and the Disney classic Mulan (1998).

Obviously, in modern adaptations of 'Much Ado About Nothing', we now have women playing women. It's a much more accepted picture to see both Men and Women on stage at the same time. I wouldn't have found it very interesting to see a man portraying a woman, unless it's a pantomime, during the Elizabethan Era. Certain Actors in those times got quite famous for their roles of playing women, but after the laws changed, those actors were out of a job. Fortunately in todays world, actors who mainly portray women can easily got another job, such as pantomimes, which happen quite often in theatres all around the world.

Table Of Comparison Between Original And Modern Version:

To finish this final entry on this assignment, I'd like to demonstrate evidence on my analysis of how the play 'Much Ado About Nothing' has been modernised for contemporary audience's but still follows the guidelines of the original script:

Elizabethan Times Original Adaptation	David Tennant and Catherine Tate Adaptation
Set in Elizabethan Times (1500’s)	Set in the 1980’s
Royalists, the men in the play were the prince’s guards.	Most of the men in the play were in the navy.
The weapons used within this age would have been swords, knives, pretty much anything that could be used as a weapon.	The weapons used within this modern adaptation would have included weapons such as guns, knives and also ceremonial swords as evidenced by the wedding scene where Benedick is holding a sword on his left side.
All of the Women in the play would have been played by Men as, during this age, it was considered illegal for Women to perform in any kind on stage.	As the modern era is a lot less sexist, Women are allowed to play Women in performances.
The play is set in Messina, possibly on the grounds of Leonarto’s Estate.	This adaptation is set in Gibraltar. I’m not quite sure on the specific location, but the whole play seems to take place within a fancy building that can hold weddings, fancy dress parties and hold special ‘Knights of the Watch’ meetings.
The transport used would have been horse and carriage, or some sort of vehicle that’s able to bring Benedick on stage.	In this adaptation, Benedick arrives in his first scene driving a golf cart.
For any music within the play, in this age they would have used a mixture of singers or instruments that would have been invented at that time.	Within the play, there are scenes that contain things such as Radio’s, Cassette tapes and a mini electric keyboard.
They would have done a masked ball for the original performance.	For this adaptation, they had a fancy dress party where the characters dressed up as whoever they wished. For example, Catherine Tate I believe was trying to mimic one of Michael Jackson’s costumes from a music video, whereas Benedick was trying to look like a female hooker of some kind.
The language used within this time would have been Elizabethan English. An example would be Beatrice saying the word “Nay…” during a scene.	The language used within this modern adaptation would be along the lines the same, but some words have a modern tone and dialect. Catherine Tate brings her famous and most recognisable line “No…” instead of the original “Nay…”

Assignment 1 - Researching Classical Plays - Entry 3: Reflecting The Culture And Coventions Of Shakespearean Time's

Introduction:

It is known all around the world that the original Globe Theatre is where William Shakespeare had held all of his plays. The architectural design of the theatre follows closely to that of Greek theatres. It's in a circular shape with an open roof. This helps the actors on stage use their own voice to project and use resonance.

But in this entry, I'd like to talk about the era in which 'Much Ado About Nothing' was made in and how it can be compared to the modern age.

Social Conventions:

During Shakespeare's time in the theatrical world, his theatre, the Globe Theatre, was one of the most successful and prospering landmarks of the time. Shakespeare had audiences from around the world to visit his works. The Theatre is only meant to fit a population of around 3,000, but as his fame grew, more people came to watch exceeding numbers of 10,000. Now that is indeed a lot of people to fit into a small theatre! Keep in mind that this number would be reached each week, so that means the theatre would have been quite crowded much more than none at the time.

"Society in Shakespeare's time consisted of a strict social order, developing religious and political systems, and quirky antecedent reminders of period perceptions. Social hierarchy dictated ones position in life throughout England. Individuals fell into one of four castes: gentlemen, citizens/burgesses, yeomen, and artificers/labourers."  - Quote from: http://www.britaininprint.net/shakespeare/study_tools/overview.html

During this era, population was reaching exceeding numbers at a vast speed. Between 1550 and 1600, London alone grew from a small population of 12,000 to 200,000. Having so much people meant that entertainment become a major priority in terms of social interaction. Having this much people also meant that food became an abundance, this caused Britain to be divided into specific societies. As pointed out in the quote above, there were gentlemen, whom had a lot of money to do as they wished (this would have included royalty). Citizens/burgesses, whom had enough money to get around but not nearly as much as the gentlemen. Yeomen, whom were attendants of the gentlemen society. And finally artificers/labourers, whom would have had to work on farms and/or mines to help maintain food and materials.

To watch Shakespeare's plays was quite fair in terms of currency. It only cost 1 penny to stand in the yard (right in front/around the stage under the open roof). Of course this would have meant if rain were to occur within a performance then the audience here would get wet. 3 pennies to sit anywhere within the gallery, this area had a roof and seats when compared against the yard, where people have to stand. Then there were the gentlemen's rooms, where the more richer people would sit, and the 4th Gallery (also known as the Balcony), where the royalty of the time would have sat such as Queen Elizabeth. Shakespeare had a whole range of genres at his disposal including Comedy, Tragedy, and Historical. These plays would have had thousands of lines of dialogue, some language of which Shakespeare had made himself. Seeing as performances would have more than likely have been a weekly event, the actors on stage would have had to know all of their lines and cues within a short space of time. So indeed quite stressful!

Of course, there was also rivals of the Globe Theatre within Elizabethan London, the Globe Theatre wasn't the only place where people could go to watch plays of any kind. An example would be a theatre called the Boar's Head Inn. This theatre followed the 'amphitheatre' shape, just like the Globe, but the different and unique thing about it was that it had a stage in the shape of an octagon, unlike the Globe's stage which followed a simple square shape. Since it was technically more of an Inn, drinks were a favoured custom among audiences, meaning that this theatre was indeed a competing rival against the Globe in terms of funds gained each performance/week. But because of William Shakespeare's much more unique style and directing, his plays became much more famed and recognised and they were what mainly brought these people through these times. "His works were history, information, political statements and popular media combining all facets of the surrounding world and society to present an entertaining and profitable theatrical experience." - Quote from: http://www.britaininprint.net/shakespeare/study_tools/overview.html

Women were treated quite harshly in the Elizabethan Era. They were not allowed to perform in any plays or any kind of performance anywhere, they couldn't go to school like the men, they had to learn everything at home via tutor, they were not allowed to enter any university, they were not allowed to be heirs to their fathers titles (this excludes the royalists), they could not become Doctors or Lawyers, they were not allowed to have the vote or have anything to do with politics, and they were not allowed to join the army and/or navy. - information from: http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/elizabethan-women.htm

Getting married to a man was also just as unfair, they almost had no choice in anything during their lives. When getting married to a man (whether that be at age 12, since it was legal to marry at this age, or the more common aged 21 women), the wife to be had to bring a Dowry into consideration. A Dowry is a collection of all the wife's possessions such as money, household items (furniture, appliances etc.) and any sort of residence that they owned at the time. Should the Dowry meet the groom's requirements, that is when they wed. Once the two individuals are married, the man is now in control of the woman, everything that she does is by his say. This can definitely be compared to owning a slave essentially. - information from: http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/elizabethan-marriages-and-weddings.htm

Cultural Conventions:

"Plays and open air entertainments were hugely popular with people fom all walks of life, from commoners to monarchs, both Queen Elizabeth and King James being supporters of the artform. Plays were performed along with music, dance and exotic animal fights in an increasing number of purpose built open theatres." - Quote from: http://www.britaininprint.net/shakespeare/study_tools/overview.html

The theatre industry during the Elizabethan Era would have been constantly busy, the high culture of the Elizabethan Renaissance was best exhibited through theatre. Historical topics were especially popular among commoners, not to mention the usual comedies and tragedies that Shakespeare would create from scratch.

There were also musicians from all over the world that visited England to offer their services and skills and they were in great demand at Courts, churches, country houses, and more than mostly at local festivals which would highlight the course of their careers. There was a very strong interest in folk songs and ballads, these songs were designed to tell real life stories from across the world. These musicians would have also had a role within Shakespeare's plays, possibly mainly playing during the transition of scenes.

Fine Art was also an aspiring culture within the Elizabethan Era. Although much more famous examples of Fine Art came from Italy and Eastern Europe, it was still considered a prospering talent.

There was a whole lot more culture within the Elizabethan Era. Many examples could be festivals for seasonal entertainment for all, plays from other theatres, miracle plays (stories re-enacted from the bible), fairs for tourists and population to socialize and have fun, jousts and tournaments, games and sports (card games, wrestling, bar drinking, archery, dice, and hunting animals/creatures. information from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabethan_era#Popularculture

In terms of religion, "Elizabeth said "I have no desire to make windows into mens' souls". Her desire to moderate the religious persecutions of previous Tudor reigns — the persecution of Catholics under Edward VI, and of Protestants under Mary I — appears to have had a moderating effect on English society. Elizabeth reinstated the Protestant bible and English Mass, yet for a number of years refrained from persecuting Catholics." - Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabethan_era#Religion

Political Conventions:

England has never really been a successful military power, especially during the Elizabethan Era. But one thing that England has always had is a brilliant and powerful navy. "On balance, it can be said that Elizabeth provided the country with a long period of general if not total peace and generally increasing prosperity due in large part to stealing from Spanish treasure ships, raiding settlements with low defenses, and selling African slaves. Having inherited a virtually bankrupt state from previous reigns, her frugal policies restored fiscal responsibility. Her fiscal restraint cleared the regime of debt by 1574, and ten years later the Crown enjoyed a surplus of £300,000." - Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabethan_era#Government

England had much lower taxes than any other European countries at the time. This was why the Elizabethan Era is often than not referred to as the "Golden Age". The economy and general wealth of England was striving at a momentous level. The development of everything during this "Golden Age" was absolutely remarkable. This was a time of peace and prosperity for England, and we've never had anything like this since. That's why the Elizabethan Era is one of the greatest moments in history for England alone.

references:

http://www.shakespearesglobe.com/uploads/files/2014/01/audiences.pdf

http://www.britaininprint.net/shakespeare/study_tools/overview.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabethan_era#High_culture

Assignment 1 - Researching Classical Plays - Entry 2: Social, Cultural and Political Themes of 'Much Ado About Nothing'

Social Themes Of 'Much Ado About Nothing':

Love, Jealousy, Envy, Murder, Deceit

Love is a major theme within 'Much Ado About Nothing' since the whole general plot of the play is based around it. Claudio loves Hero, Beatrice loves Benedick (even if they try to deny it). Pretty much every character in this play is, in some way or another, in love with someone. There is also unrequited love, take Don John for example, although he isn't loved by Hero, he does love her and tries to break up the relationship between her and Claudio.

This also ties into many other themes in the play, Jealousy (with Don John trying to ruin the relationship between Claudio and Hero and how he resents Don Pedro), Envy (again, Don John wanting to have what he can't have, which is Hero and trying to get his own back on Don Pedro by way of Claudio), Murder (when Beatrice asks of Benedick to "kill Claudio")

Though thinking about it a bit more, these themes can be considered difficult to discuss. In life, at some stage, Love can prove difficulties/problems to occur. This does happen in the play when Claudio and Hero are about to get married, both of their relationships with one another are tested at this point in front of every other character. Claudio believes something which Hero denies, making the question occur within my mind if he does really love her at all. Jealousy only seems to appear with Don John, I can't discover any other character who is jealous of another. Through Don John being jealous of Claudio, the events of the play transpire so that everything eventually comes out at the main wedding between Claudio and Hero. This is when another theme comes up, Shame. The public shaming of Hero in the wedding scene between her and Claudio is one of the most impacting scene in the entire play. A lot happens in this scene alone. Obviously, Hero is publicly shamed in front of her family and friends, Claudio is deceived by Don John's lies and Beatrice offers her love to Benedick if he were to kill Claudio for what he had done to Hero. The theme of Honour also comes into question for this scene. Claudio has this line to say about Hero to Leonarto:

"Sweet prince, you learn me noble thankfulness. There, Leonarto, take her back again, give not this rotten orange to your friend; She's but the sign and semblance of her honour."

At this point, Hero's reputation is broken, and so is Claudio's to an extent. Is honour non-existent to these characters? Do they not care what people think of them? Claudio is fully willing to make a fool of himself at his own wedding without even consulting other people if what Don John is saying is indeed true.

At the end of the day, I find Beatrice and Benedick's love/hate relationship with each other much more interesting. The relationship between these two characters is much more enduring when compared against Claudio and Hero's. While Claudio shows the simple 'love at first sight' scenario, describing how beautiful Hero is to everyone and how he wants to eventually marry her, Beatrice and Benedick meanwhile share a whole bunch of banter with each other. They don't necessarily hate each other, but they try to find ways of getting around their infinite love for each other. They both quickly appear to be the main character(s) of the play, even though Claudio and Hero's relationship carries heavier weight in the plays plot. Again, quite confusing, but I like the differentiation between the relationships in the play. I guess it can be considered that Claudio and Hero's relationship is the main plot, whereas Beatrice and Benedick's relationship is part of a sub plot.

Cultural Themes Of 'Much Ado About Nothing':

Ways of Entertainment, Counterfeiting

Within 'Much Ado About Nothing', there are various signs of entertainment being introduced. Starting from the witty, yet simplistic mind of Balthasar with his songs, Beatrice comparing weddings/marriage and courtship to dance:

“wooing, wedding and repenting is as a Scotch jig, a measure, and a cinquepace” - Beatrice, Act 2 Scene 1.

and even the ending dance scene of the play involving all of the characters before the bowing of the actors. The whole play in its entirety comes across as a real source of entertainment within its own theatrical purpose.

The idea of Counterfeiting appears frequently throughout the play. An example of this happening can be seen included within a scene with Leonarto, Claudio, and Don Pedro having a conversation about Beatrice and how that she is so irresistibly in love with Benedick. Benedick eavesdrops on this scene in the background and he fully believes what these characters are saying about Beatrice. Towards the scenes end, Leonarto tries to dismiss the fact of Beatrice loving Benedick by way of this quote:

"O God! Counterfeit? There was never counterfeit of passion came so near the life of passion as she discovers it." - Leonarto, Act 2 Scene 3.

There is another case of counterfeiting within the play, this occurs at the wedding between Claudio and Hero. Claudio refers to Hero of how she, in his mind, lies to him by using this quote:

She’s but the sign and semblance of her honour. Behold how like a maid she blushes here! O, what authority and show of truth can cunning sin cover itself withal! - Claudio, Act 4 Scene 1.


Political Themes Of 'Much Ado About Nothing':

At first hand, I found it to be quite difficult to discover anything 'political' about the play. But, in fact, there is a partial subplot that could count as being political action. This is by form of Dogberry and his crew in the Knights Watch. When watching modern examples closely, I could see how they brought order to the stage, and how their main goal is to maintain the stability of life for the citizens of Messina.

Dogberry and his crew do, after all, discover Don John's grand scheme to ruin the wedding between Hero and Claudio and put him to justice for his crimes of deceitfulness towards Claudio.

references: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/wiki/Revision:Much_ado_about_nothing_themes_motifs_and_symbols

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabethan_government

http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/elizabethan-politics-and-government.htm

http://www.britaininprint.net/shakespeare/study_tools/overview.html

Assignment 1 - Researching Classical Plays - Entry 1: The Original Staging and Performance Style of 'Much Ado About Nothing'

Brief Introduction:

'Much Ado About Nothing' is one of the comedic plays written by William Shakespeare during the middle of his career as a playwright, it has been considered by many to be one of Shakespeare's best plays in terms of its comedic stature.

The Original Staging of 'Much Ado About Nothing':

The first original performance of 'Much Ado About Nothing', during Elizabethan times, would have been performed in the original Globe Theatre in London. The setting of the play is set in Messina and takes place mainly within the grounds of Leonarto's estate.

One thing that Shakespeare didn't have, which we do, is stage elements such as Lighting and Set. Performances of all plays would of mainly started at mid-day, since that's when the sun is overhead and can shine its rays into the open roof of the Globe Theatre. Although there tends to be lots of scenes that take place during night-time, the actors on-stage signify this to the audience by bringing out sources of light such as candles/lanterns. Other than using simple props, there would have been lines said by the characters within that certain scene to refer to the weather/time of day that is occurring within the play. This also brings the participation of the audience into the play, as they would have to imagine that it is night-time in order to get the full effect. The same goes for the set, the characters can say lines that feature the appearance of an object/scenery even if it's not there to be seen by the audience. Thus, they would have to use their imagination again to get that full effect and to be drawn into the world of the play.

Costumes would have also been a huge deal during the time of Shakespeare. A sufficient currency was quite rare for the average folk, meaning that Shakespeare would have had limited resources to use in terms of costumes. Over the span of all of his plays, it would be quite common to see the same costumes being used, or at least a variation of it. For example, we could see Beatrice wearing a certain dress in 'Much Ado About Nothing`, but then see the same dress again in 'Romeo and Juliet'. By doing this, Shakespeare had saved quite a lot of money to use for other things such as more props/objects of interest, drinks/food for the cast members, to change the set of the Globe Theatres stage to match the theme of the play being performed, and to get background musicians/singers.

Traditional Costumes in Shakespearian play's would have looked like this:



Of course, depending on the status of the character, the costume would be designed differently. Much poorer people would have worn rags, or some form of cheap clothing. Whereas in this picture, which features quite noble looking people, their clothing is tailored and fitted to them in an expensive material.

This picture can be used as an example for costumes that poorer people would have worn:

The Architectural design of the original Globe Theatre looks a little bit like this:

As we can see, each area of the theatre has it's own special purpose. Let's delve into the key areas of the original Globe Theatre so we can get an informed idea as to what they would of been, or still are, used for, like in plays for example.

The Yard:

Also known as 'The Pit', this area of the Globe would contain the poorest of the poor to watch Shakespeare's shows. To think of how it must of been for these people to stand for hours upon end watching these plays is indescribable. People in Elizabethan times would of only had to pay 1 penny in order to stand in the Yard to watch the performance. This area was typically known to be quite dangerous, as it was right in front of the stage where the action is contained, and if, for example, props were thrown around the stage, the people in the yard are more at danger of being hit by these props as there is no safety rails.

This area of the theatre typically contained a large crowd. So much so that there would be people in rows of lines shoulder to shoulder. The bad thing about this is that whenever someone would, for example, need to do their 'business', they had to do it where they were standing, as there was no room to get out of the theatre. As we can gather, this area of the Globe Theatre was pretty untidy back in the day of Shakespeare, there are numerous safety hazards to think of here, not to mention the many risks people would have gone through standing right next to each other. Diseases and hygiene were a big deal during these times.

One of the main bad things about standing in The Yard, is that it's below an open air roof, meaning that if it were to rain during a performance, people standing in the Yard would obviously get wet. The ground was also covered with litter, so there would have been plenty of rodents coming out to snatch potential wasting's during performance times, putting the audience in this area at risk of disease.

When the weather is much warmer with clear, sunny skies, the people standing in the Yard would of been commonly referred to as the 'Stinkards' - meaning "smelly people" in a sense. Audience members in the Yard would have crowded around the entire stage in a square shaped fashion following its structure.

I took a picture at the Globe Theatre in London showing what the full Globe Theatre would look like:

The 3 Levels of Galleries:

These 3 areas of the Globe Theatre belong to the people that paid a little bit more than those standing in the Yard. To put it into a modern, realistic perspective, say there were 3 price ranges for the seats in the Gallery. The bottom Gallery costs £3, the middle costs £5, and the top one costs £7. To compare these prices to that which would have been in Elizabethan Era, they would change to the bottom costing 2 pennies, the middle costing 3 pennies, and the top costing 4 pennies.  The higher up you are in the gallery, the more recognized you are, especially in Elizabethan times, as it would have signified that you were richer than the people sitting below you. There are two sets of stairs outside of the theatre which would lead up to each level of the gallery.

Unlike the Yard, the Gallery does have a roof which would cover the audience from the rain (if it were to occur during a performance). Each gallery going up has 3 rows of seats, with each one going back being longer than the one before to follow the shape of the Globe Theatre. Sitting in any area of the gallery would had obviously given you a much better view of the performance compared to the people standing in the Yard, which is a compliment and a reason towards the higher price.

Here is a picture I took of all 3 levels of the gallery:

The 4th Gallery AKA The Stage Gallery:

There is one area in the original Globe Theatre's design that was very special, This area is called The Stage Gallery. It follows the same concept as the 3 Levels of Galleries, but this area was specifically designed to seat the richest of the richest, which would of been the royal family at the time. These rich people will be on-stage above the actors whilst they perform, meaning that everyone standing/sitting in front of the stage will see them as well as the actors.

In certain scenarios, such as Juliet's balcony scene in the play 'Romeo and Juliet', the rich people sitting on the Stage Gallery will be right beside the actor performing their lines in the scene, which allows them to perceive the scene in a much different way than everyone else in the entire theatre. Musicians in the performance would have also been placed within this area.

The Gentlemen's Room:

Much like the Stage Gallery, although this area isn't on the stage itself, the Gentlemen's room was an area specifically designed to sit the more posh people within Elizabethan society. These rooms are located on the upper left and right side of the stage, being the same height as the 3rd Gallery and they were private areas only to sit very posh people. Just the same as the royal family, the people in the Gentlemen's room would be seen by other spectators in the theatre.

This area of the theatre would have also cost 4 pennies, possibly the same as the 3rd level in the gallery, but this area came with complimentary cushions to sit/lean on.

Here is a picture I took of the Gentlemen's room: https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=622&q=the+globe+theatre+gentlemens+room&oq=the+globe+theatre+gentlemens+room&gs_l=img.3...1000.7325.0.7614.33.14.0.18.18.0.98.1017.14.14.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..14.19.1072.vsdRZYI29hU#imgrc=dCNvTpq93IVcVM%3A

The Stage:

The stage of the Globe Theatre in the Elizabethan Era would have been quite large, probably the same size as the modern day version. The stage is made of wood and, depending on the play, would be covered with leaves, flowers etc.

The stage is also quite tall, here is a picture that I took of the modern day Globe Theatre stage just so you can get a visual representation:

The steps in front of the stage are for the sole purpose of the performance being shown. The stage wouldn't normally have these steps, but you can get an idea of how tall the stage is just by imagining it without the steps.

Here is a picture without the steps: https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=622&q=the+globe+theatre+gentlemens+room&oq=the+globe+theatre+gentlemens+room&gs_l=img.3...1000.7325.0.7614.33.14.0.18.18.0.98.1017.14.14.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..14.19.1072.vsdRZYI29hU#imgdii=dCNvTpq93IVcVM%3A%3BdCNvTpq93IVcVM%3A%3Bt3UxV1PIiGtcgM%3A&imgrc=dCNvTpq93IVcVM%3A

Trapdoors (Hell And Heaven):

There is a trap door located on the stage itself, and the purpose of this is to create dramatic visual effects such as smoke, people being hanged, creatures raising from hell, and sometimes ghosts of evil characters would spawn from this doors. This trapdoor in particular wasn't just simply called a trapdoors, it was eventually given a specific name: Hell. This does make sense since it's below the stage and there were also plenty of situations in plays where creatures, or some sort of hell spawn, would come up from this trapdoor. Examples can be the ghost of Hamlet's father in 'Hamlet', and Caliban in 'The Tempest'. There would have also been quite an atmosphere coming from this area, since Shakespeare also used sound effects. He did this by way of having instruments being played slightly, actors pretending to be certain animals and also making creepy noises to signify the entrance of a ghost.

Here is a picture of the trapdoor (Hell) located on the stage: https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=622&q=the+globe+theatre+trapdoor&oq=the+globe+theatre+tr&gs_l=img.3.1.0i24l2.883.4449.0.6375.20.12.0.3.3.0.337.1686.2-4j2.6.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..11.9.1731.zf2DdDOIh8Y#imgrc=_

There is also another trapdoor located on the Globe Theatre stage...right above the trapdoor for hell on the canopy. This trapdoor was specifically given the name: Heaven. Again, for the simple reason that actors would come down from above to the stage. Instead of creatures and ghosts, there were angel's/fairies. There would have also been stunts performed to get the actor off stage quickly. There is rope and several rigging lines above the roof of the stage that allows the actors to fly around the stage after entering from above.

Here is a picture of 'Heaven': https://www.google.com/search?site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1034&bih=851&q=globe+theatre+heavens&oq=globe+theatre+heave&gs_l=img.3.0.0.3456.9112.0.10285.25.17.3.5.6.0.133.898.16j1.17.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..0.25.914.RGBcQvVAt8k&safe=active&ssui=on#safe=active&tbm=isch&q=globe+theatre+heavens

The Stage Pillars:

There are pillars located on the Globe Theatre stage that are primarily used to help support the canopy of the stage. These pillars also play an interesting role in all of Shakespeare's plays, for example, in Act 2 Scene 3 of 'Much Ado About Nothing', Benedick withdraws from the main stage to hide from Don Pedro, Leonarto, and Claudio as they enter the scene after his monologue. While the scene transpires with the three characters, Benedick is in the background behind the pillars to hide his presence. These pillars can also be imagined as a piece of scenery, such as trees for example.

Here is a picture of a pillar on the Globe Theatre stage: https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=622&q=the+globe+theatre+gentlemens+room&oq=the+globe+theatre+gentlemens+room&gs_l=img.3...1000.7325.0.7614.33.14.0.18.18.0.98.1017.14.14.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..14.19.1072.vsdRZYI29hU#hl=en&tbm=isch&q=the+globe+theatre+stage+pillars&imgrc=yMq1hCDT4yq_tM%3A



The Original Performance Style of 'Much Ado About Nothing':

'Much Ado About Nothing' is one of Shakespeare's more uniquely notable plays since the majority of the dialogue spoken between all of the character's in written in Prose. Shakespeare had moved between both Verse and Prose in his writings to add more realism to each character, increasing their purpose and individuality within a scene/play. It also gives his plays a much more rhythmic pattern, making it much more interesting to read as each line flows fluently and creates a much better imaginative picture.

The Iambic Pentameter:

These are the three forms of The Iambic Pentameter William Shakespeare had used in his plays:

Blank Verse:

When William Shakespeare used the Blank Verse form for The Iambic Pentameter, each line began with a capitalized letter, even if the line ended with a comma instead of a full stop, the next line was to begin with a capitalized letter. This was still done without regarding the standard rules of capitalization. Blank Verse is employed in a wide range of situations, because this form comes closer to the natural speaking rhythms of English but will also raise it above the ordinary without sounding artificial. Blank Verse, opposed to Prose, is used mainly for passionate, lofty or momentous occasions and for introspection; it may suggest a refinement of character. Many of Shakespeare’s most famous character speeches were written in Blank Verse. The plays include 'Macbeth', 'Henry V', 'Hamlet' and 'The Tempest'. A speech or scene written in Blank Verse may end with a single rhyming couplet known as a capping couplet. It is mainly used to lend a final punch, a concluding flourish or a note of climax to end the speech or scene.

Rhyme Verse:

The Rhyme Verse is often used in ritualistic or choral effects and for highly lyrical or sententious passages that give advice or point to a moral (for example, the Duke’s speech at the end of Act 3 in 'Measure for Measure'). The Rhyme Verse will also be used for songs written in the plays (Amiens in 'As You Like It'; Feste in 'Twelve Night'; Ariel in 'The Tempest', and Balthasar in 'Much Ado About Nothing'). In examples of bad verse (the Pyramus and Thisbe scene in 'A Midsummer Night’s Dream', and Orlando’s bad poetry in 'As You Like It'); also being contained in Prologues, Epilogues and Choruses of plays (the Chorus in 'Henry V', Pucks Epilogue in 'A Midsummer Night’s Dream'). in Masques (Hymen In 'As You Like It', Iris, Ceres and Juno in 'The Tempest'). And plays within plays (Pyramus and Thisbe in 'A Midsummer Night’s Dream', the Mousetrap play in 'Hamlet'), where it distinguishes these imaginary performances from the ”real world” of the play. It is also used for many manifestations of the supernatural (examples like the witches from 'Macbeth', the fairies in 'A Midsummer Night’s Dream'; Ariel in 'The Tempest'), but it will not be used for Ghosts/Spirits in plays (examples like the ghost of Hamlet’s father in 'Hamlet'), who retain the human use of Blank Verse.

An Explanation of Prose:

Shakespeare had designed Prose to be much different than Verse. Instead of having beats to each syllable (Iambic Pentameter), for example, da-DUM / da-DUM / da-DUM / da-DUM / da-DUM, Prose would be notable with lines that just go on like modern day people speak. There would be no form of rhyme within the line, and there would be little to no use of correct punctuation, such as commas and full stops.

Prose is used whenever a line seems more bizarre than others. Scenes that use Prose more commonly is in the play 'Macbeth', since some of the characters in this play have scenes where they actually go mad (examples include Macbeth, and Lady Macbeth). There are also other plays that use Prose. For example, plays like 'Hamlet', 'Ophelia', 'Edgar' and 'King Lear'. Some audience members at the time of Shakespeare considered Prose to be too regular and orderly for expressing madness. Prose would mainly be used in cynical commentary (examples range from Jacques and Touchstone in the play 'As You Like It', Edmund also in 'King Lear'). It is used for simple exposition, transitions or contrast (used in the first scenes of 'As You Like It', 'The Tempest', and 'King Lear'). It is used also in scenes of everyday life (Bottom and company in 'A Midsummer Night’s Dream', Corin in 'As You Like It', and William, Bates and Court in 'Henry V'). Furthermore, Prose can be used for bantering, relaxed or unbuttoned conversations happening in plays (Celia, Rosalind and Touchstone in 'As You Like It', Gower, Fluellen, MacMorris and Jamie in 'Henry V', Prince Hal and Falstaffin in 'Henry IV', and Beatrice and Benedick in 'Much Ado About Nothing').

In Shakespeare plays, Prose would be used more commonly by lower classed characters so that they differentiate from the higher class, which would use Verse. This would not always be the case, however, since 'Much Ado About Nothing' features mostly higher classed characters but the majority of the script is written in Prose. I guess this is what makes the play stand out above all other Shakespeare plays since nearly all of the characters are relatable and I personally feel that using Prose more than Verse makes me more inclined to watch the play as I have a better understanding of the language used.

By taking the formal language from Verse and putting it into Prose for the majority of 'Much Ado About Nothing' also adds a lot of comic value by the form of Dogberry and his crew. These characters can be seen as lower class citizens, yet they are using formal language which would be used normally by people of higher status. Shakespeare plays around with this however by having real lower classed characters, such as Dogberry, use formal words but not pronouncing them correctly or using them in the wrong context.

For example, when watching the adaptation of 'Much Ado About Nothing' starring Catherine Tate and David Tennant, and also reading the script, Dogberry had this line to say in Act 3 Scene 5 whilst he was talking to Leonarto:

"One word, sir: our watch, sir, have indeed comprehended two aspicious persons, and we would have this morning examined before your worship."

What Dogberry is meant to be saying in this scene is the words "Apprehend" and "Suspicious", but for the reasons as said above, it proves to be a memorable moment of comic value within the play.

Unfortunately, I'm not able to include the same adaptation of 'Much Ado About Nothing' in this blog, but I can include a link to a YouTube video containing the scene that I've just spoke about. Dogberry says the line at 1:52: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zmOn6uSDyI

The actors in this video don't use it to the same effect as the one we watched in class, but nonetheless, Dogberry says the same line and it's funny as it makes no sense.

Shakespeare had used a whole bunch of rhetorical devices within the play, this may have been done because he mostly used Prose rather than Verse. By using this language technique, Shakespeare had made his characters connect to the audience, whether that be within a scene with several characters or in a soliloquy, to evoke an emotional response such as laughter, sadness etc.

Here are some of the more eye-catching Rhetorical Devices he had used in the play:

Rhyming - Different words that sound the same. For example in Act 5 Scene 2, Benedick has this song to sing. The rhymes will be in Bold:

"The god of love,
That sits above,
And knows me, and knows me,
How pitiful I deserve,--
I mean in singing; but in loving, Leander the good
swimmer, Troilus the first employer of panders, and
a whole bookful of these quondam carpet-mangers,
whose names yet run smoothly in the even road of a
blank verse, why, they were never so truly turned
over and over as my poor self in love. Marry, I
cannot show it in rhyme; I have tried: I can find
out no rhyme to 'lady' but 'baby,' an innocent
rhyme; for 'scorn,' 'horn,' a hard rhyme; for,
'school,' 'fool,' a babbling rhyme; very ominous
endings: no, I was not born under a rhyming planet,
nor I cannot woo in festival terms."

Repetition - Saying the same word multiple times in a sentence. This rhetorical device is used frequently in 'Much Ado About Nothing' since repeating a word or phrase draws more attention to it. For example, in Act 5 Scene 2, Beatrice says this line:

"Foul words is but foul wind, and foul wind is but foul breath"

The word 'foul' is repeated six times in just three lines. I think this was done because Shakespeare wanted the audience to draw more attention to how unhappy Beatrice is at this point in the play.

Alliteration - When saying multiple words that start with the same letter in a sentence, for example "Aardvarks are awesome". Let's stay on topic, in terms of the play, I do have an example. In Act 1 Scene 1, Beatrice and Benedick are trading insults to each other and then Beatrice says the line:

"A bird of my tongue is better than a beast of yours."

Notice how she is using the letter 'B' to essentially be contemptuous toward Benedick. Seeing that it's a line that flows well with the tongue, in my opinion, I consider it to be the most impactful insult in the scene between the two characters.

references: https://www.digitaltheatreplus.com/study-guides/much-ado-about-nothing/language/prose-less-naturalistic-than-verse

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Much_Ado_About_Nothing#On_stage

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globe_Theatre, http://www.shakespearesglobe.com/

http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/globe-theatre-interior.htm

http://www.william-shakespeare.info/william-shakespeare-globe-theatre-structure.htm

'Road' By Jim Cartwright Full Blog Entry: My Understanding Of The Contextual Research

How and Why Is It All Relevant To 'Road'?

The Contextual Research is used to highlight the socio-economic circumstances in which the play is set. I have chosen to highlight some of Margaret Thatcher's reign, Music that may have influenced people, and the historical belonging that Skin-Lad identified in becoming a Skinhead and his subsequent conversion to Buddhism.

Margaret Thatcher's reign as the first female British prime minister was so prominent during the 1980's since it was such a massive turning point, in terms of the perception on society as a whole, when she came to power. Whilst in power, she was known to be a competitor - never backing down to anything. This is one of the main reasons why she is remembered today.

All of the economic issues that arose during the 1970's, during the recession, saw tough times for people throughout the UK, but particularly so for the people up North. In the 1980's, as the country came out of the recession, wealth returned slowly to the south of the UK. The ensuing miners strikes and the subsequent closure of coal pits lead to significant poverty and deprivation in many towns in the north of the country, leading to mass unemployment and little retraining or skills to move people into other work.

As we see in Road, many of the characters are unemployed and have little or no prospect of getting a job. Most feel that the government has forgotten them and they are being left to rot in their little towns and villages. Even today there is still many areas that never recovered fully after the pits closed. The characters in Road see all of these changes happen right in front of them, yet they do nothing for themselves to get out of it. They all become so despondent that they don't feel that there's any future for them, and that nothing good will ever come their way. This is why they resort to drinking, drugs and prostitution in order to forget their problems in the world.

How Does This All Change My Understanding and Interpretation of Skin-Lad?

When first reading 'Road', I had perceived Skin-Lad as a violent thug more than anything else. I knew nothing of the era which the play takes place in, so this is what motivated me to go out and research about the 1980's, to give me a more educational understanding in the social and economic circumstances in which the residents of 'Road' find themselves in.

The evolution of my character changed considerably by the understanding of the research I had completed throughout the project. My interpretation of Skin-Lad had changed from me viewing him as a non-social violent thug to what I now think is a messed up, confused, depressed young man looking for the right answers to his own identity.

The problems that occurred during the 1980's and also the people that appear in 'Road' has made a massive impact upon Skin-Lad's own persona. Residents view him as yet another low life who had stumbled his way into their own little prison, trapped by their own incompetence and ignorance, unwilling to seek out any changes that may benefit them in having a different kind of future for themselves. Skin-Lad finds this when he converts to Buddhism - he realizes what kind of situation he's in by being a part of 'Road' and seeks to find his own escape from this harsh world to something much better.

'Road' By Jim Cartwright - Evaluation

‘Road’ is set during 1987, in a small town near Lancashire. I had imagined the street on ‘Road’ to be a long worn down street that has suffered because of the economy breaking down, poverty is rife and teenagers are laying graffiti all over.

This interpretation of the setting came to me when recalling the location of my dad’s childhood home; he used to live on a street just like this. There is row upon row of houses, hidden by the main high street, unseen by passers-by. Since the mines closed and jobs were scarce, this area has become ransacked; the houses are near demolished since no-one lives in them anymore.

The contextual research helped me in the understanding of the 1980’s and what the characters in ‘Road’ might have gone through in their lives. The increase in tax, higher prices for everyday essentials and jobs becoming even harder to find helped me understand why these characters are the way they are. They couldn’t do anything for themselves to escape ‘Road’ unless they left the past behind and moved away.

Each of the characters individual roles takes us on a different journey; we witness how life is treating them during this time. Some characters are better off than most however, my character, Skin-Lad, found his own escape from ‘Road’ by having a belief in Buddhist culture. By conducting research into Buddhism, I now understand that he changes his own life completely by guiding himself away from the life of a Skinhead into a more ‘peaceful life’.

I had a continuous engagement in the feedback sessions by viewing the other performances of fellow students and we all gave helpful tips to help improve our characterisation and/or physicality of the character whilst on stage. This formed a great relationship between all of us.

I found my personal management within this project to be below-par. I was unable to attend all of the sessions, but I countered this by the amount of time I’ve put into the work and dedication in my Blogs and my role as Skin-Lad.

I was willing to shave my own hair off to bring a much more realistic impression to my performance as Skin-Lad, I also purchased the appropriate clothing worn by the majority of Skinheads during the 1980’s.

I’d been told by my peers that I portrayed the role as much more intimidating and ‘not like myself’ at all. Doing this helped in the growth and development of me as an actor and I’ll continue to do things such as this in future roles.

In terms of learning my lines, I was one of, if not, the first member of the group to learn all of the lines as their character. I have done so much in-between each session to come up with different ideas for the monologue to show my own interpretation of it to the audience.

Each session I performed my monologue as Skin-Lad to the group were met with massively positive results, some had mentioned that it gets better each time they saw it. Having feedback like this gave me much more confidence with the character in both areas of vocalisation and physicality. This is mainly what helped me during the main performance in front of a live audience, and I appreciate their positive contribution for my own benefit.

My response to my lecturer’s directions in each session is positive. I sometimes agreed with her intentions for each character and I thought the main performance came out brilliantly; each scene in the play was executed confidently and I couldn’t see that it could have been performed any better.

My response to the directions for my monologue before and during the final week was mostly positive, although it was near negative at first in the final week. I say this because I had done so much work on the monologue to make it what I had interpreted him to be, i.e. an intimidating and threatening character towards the audience members by going right into their faces.

This was changed at the last minute by my lecturers for my character to be pulled back from approaching the audience into what I like to picture as a ‘cage’ which was shown by a single light source in the middle of the stage and therefore limiting my physicality. I accepted the use of the light cage; it helped me in containing Skin-Lad’s frustration towards others and even himself. By looking at our lecturer’s direction objectively, it helped me enhance my characters role and my overall performance.

Many members of the group said that my overall physicality as Skin-Lad was "Brilliant" and I had interpreted the character very well. Audience members and even the front of house staff were astonished by my appearance.

During rehearsal sessions, I had made use of the whole stage. This helped my character talk about his journey about how he has to be fit to fight. This was changed for the final showing of Skin-Lad to be restricted to a light cage. I adapted well to this change as I feel I still came across as a scary character but not as near intimating.

Since my interpretation of the character was changed at last minute, I felt as though this effect was lost but this could be countered by how the audience members were reacting once I had walked out of the theatre post-show.

Throughout the whole rehearsal process, there were areas which needed to be worked on, mostly the accent which often sounded Scottish.

Another weakness I had during the rehearsal process was that I had a tendency to perform my monologue differently each time as I had researched so much information on the era.

For the next project, I will work on the weaknesses above to hopefully have an improved performance with my new character. This will allow me to gain more confidence in these areas as an actor and it will show me that I’ve clearly developed my performance skills post-‘Road’.

'Road' By Jim Cartwright Full Blog Entry: Week 7 & 8

'Road' By Jim Cartwright - Section 4: Pre-Show Planning, Off Script Rehearsals, Discussion on some Other Portrayals, Looking at Refining Scenes, More Feedback, Discussion about the first Full Run-Through of 'Road', More Feedback for the first Full Run-Through of 'Road'
 

Week 7

 



Pre-Show Planning (Structure):

 

After 2 weeks away for our Easter Holiday's, we had returned to rehearsals for 'Road'. For this first session, we had worked on the structure of the 'Pre-Show' which I thought brought a repetitive feel to our performance as it's showing what's to be expected later on with all the different characters. For the Pre-Show, our lecturer took her main interests into the blocking of the actors portraying the Professor and Scullery, but before doing this, should was to decide where each character was to be sitting/standing on stage. During this, our lecturer wants each character to perform a specific actions which relates to their scene/monologue to give that repetitive feel. I personally liked this decision as it gives the audience a picture as to what's to come later on in the performance.

We mainly looked at each of the interactions that both the Professor and Scullery were going to have with each character. This was to briefly show each of the characters different traits and personalities to keep the audience acquainted with them.

I'm happy with the look and execution of the Pre-Show, and I think it'll be good once we get to use it properly for our real performances later on in the coming weeks.

Off Script Rehearsals:

After having an entire 2 weeks off college, it should be expected that everyone in the room had learnt their lines in the script and has memorised each stage direction. I'm happy to say that I'd learnt my lines before we left for the holiday's for my final show back and over the holidays I'd acquainted myself with the set stage directions. Unfortunately, not everyone was this way. There were still a few select people who had still not learnt their lines and/or directions, which I think is quite disappointing. Hopefully they'll learn these quickly as I'd like to start doing full non-script rehearsal runs to get a real time of how long the play will last.

If there was anything that I was impressed by, it was the development of the accent for each actor. I can tell that this was the thing that they'd spent their precious time on more than anything else. Now that everything was looking to be going fairly well, we started to look at a few scenes which still needed development and/or refinement. We did this by way of '2 Stars and a Wish' so each actor had an easier time as to what needed improving the most and what they don't need any more work on as it's already good. Although this session was for the monologue's within 'Road', we each had a chance to show how to improve in areas such as the accent and overall the physicalisation of the character and how they had interpreted it.

My feedback goes as followed:

2 Stars

- Good Physicalisation: There was an overall good reaction for my show back of Skin-Lad in terms of my physicalisation. I was really starting to look the part with all of my hard work and I'm thankful for that. Some people head mentioned that my overall energy in the monologue had been twice the amount than last time, which I felt it was personally.

- Great Moments of Going towards the Audience: For the monologue, I wanted to make the audience feel more intimidated by Skin-Lad's presence. I did this by way of going nearer to the audience, so much so that I'm within their personal bubble. Everyone had a very good reaction to this, although some people felt that I wasn't going close enough. I'll work on this feedback and experiment with going closer to the audience for the next show back.

Wish

- Work on the Accent: Sadly, I still needed a little tweaking on the accent in some areas of my monologue. I somehow seemed to transition from the accents Scottish, Irish and Liverpool. Words such as "Best", "Blind Alley", "Go", "One, Two, Three" and "Won't" fell victim to this. I'd received a note that perhaps if I elongated my words, the accent would become more prominent. I'll continue to work on the accent and these words in-particular until the performance date is due.

Having this feedback after working hard for the monologue over the holiday's will really help me in the development of my portrayal of Skin-Lad. Few people have stated that my interpretation is one of the best in the group and I want to continue to live up to that high standard.

Any additional things that were added to the stars sections was that the pace was really good, it had sped up a little more compareed to last showback. The pauses I had included definitley made the scene much more tense. The "KIYAA!" line was scary for some people as they were'nt expecting it to happen.

Any additional things that were added to the stars section was that I should go more towards the audience. Nyakeh had mentioned that there seemed to be a barrier that stopped me from going closer and that I shouldn't have that, take more risks within the monologue for things like this. Luke had suggested that I should try and make Skin-Lad appear more mysterious. This can make sense as not many people in the audience might understand why he's a "Nutter". I think I would be able to show this if I worked on the pace of the monologue even more and maybe how I could say certain words differently. Luke had also suggested to add towards this that I should add a laugh to end of the line "But he was only smiling" which would pose the question as to why I found it funny.

I also recall a quote from Issie after my feedback: "Every time I've seen the monologue, its been performed differently, but this time, don't change it as it's excellent."

I had also given this form of feedback to several group members:

Frank as Jerry

2 Stars

The accent and actions done on stage during the monologue was improving, he's definitely absorbed the feedback from past sessions.

Although there were a lot of actions, it did feel sub-par at some points so I said to improve these.

Wish

I said to slow down on the monologue a little bit, not so much that the scene drags, but so he has the time needed to pronounce words properly as he was muddling them up. It also allows more opportunities to work on actions during the monologue to help make the scene more dramatic.

Kennedy as Helen

2 Stars

I felt that the accent work during this scene was very good, I never found a moment where it was lost.

The physicality of the character is excellent, I believed fully that she was the character as she was experiemnting with creative risks throughout the scene.

Wish

Learn your lines!!! If the line is forgotten, it helps to just stop what you're doing completely and to just breathe in a steady pace, the line will come back and it'll still appear as though you're in character.

Sophie as Valerie

2 Stars

The accent and overall pace of the monologue was top standard, she has really worked hard on it.

I also liked all the actions within the scene, it just added to her character so much and it made the scene overall more dramatic.

Wish

"Look at my hair, it's dry." - I suggested that the character should play around with it at this point, she could do things such as stretching it and trying to untangle strands instead of just pointing at it like she did.

Week 8

Discussion on some Other Portrayal's:
I'm happy to say that I will be doing all of the things I'm doing for my character as I think it will really benefit me in my final grade, but I'd like to talk about a few other actors I've performed alongside the most within these rehearsal sessions.

Frank as Jerry

Him and I have had our discussions in character decisions and more specifically what costumes we have chosen to wear for the performance. What he's told me about his characters costume is along the lines very similar to what he wears right now being a shirt, possible cardigan, smart trousers, braces and smart shoes. This had worried me a little bit as I think the audience would still be seeing Frank and not Jerry, just with the added accent. On top of all of this, he hadn't mentioned changing his hair style or anything for this role like I have which I think is a very unwise decision for his role. I would think that Jerry, seeing as I've depicted him being one of the older members of 'Road', would be near balding or at least have bald patches. Instead, Frank will still be walking on-stage with his Ginger mane. I would of preferred Frank to wear a bald cap at the very least.

It's not that I think Frank should change his appearance completely because I asked him to, but it's just I think it'd come across as much more effective if he did, much like I'm doing. Still, at the end of the day, when I watch Frank perform his monologue as Jerry, I still see him. The mannerisms are very similar to his, the clothing is practically the same and the hair is also. Unless he makes some extreme changes like I have for Skin-Lad, I'm worried that the audience wouldn't recall him after the performance has finished. The exception of course is his family, but I don't think any one else will. But still, I know him better than most people so this may be overlooked, but it's just a thought.

Another thing about Frank's/Jerry's monologue is that he is using a sofa as a prop; he will be sitting on it and also interacting with it when he's walking around it. From what I understand in the script, Jerry is meant to be getting ready to go out, yet with Frank's portrayal, he's already dressed to go out. I think that the overall picture of the scene would of been much more effective if he came on stage wearing some sort of vest with possible shorts and also with an ironing board as a prop. While he is saying his first line, he would be ironing his shirt and as the monologue progresses, he would be putting on several pieces of clothing to eventually be ready to go out. I think that the overall pace of his monologue will have been much better if he had done this since the beginning and it would be more interesting to watch.

Luke as Bisto

Luke shares his charm and witty humour with his own portrayal of Bisto and it works very well. I've said time and time again that his interpretation is one of my favourites in 'Road' and I'd think I'm not the only one to see this. Everything from the costume and hair style decisions for Bisto is great, he had changed his appearance accordingly and I was witnessing the character and not him.

I've had conversations and rehearsal sessions involving Luke and he mentions that his interpretation is much like the works of Paddy McGuiness. Things such as his mannerisms and attitude towards things, involving subtle jokes, is all inspired by this figure and I think that Luke portrays it brilliantly.

If there is anything I would of changed for his portrayal of Bisto is that he could of possibly worn more 'bling' as he is a Disco DJ and he also comes across as a sort of 'dude'.

One final point about Luke's performance as Bisto is his addition of improvised dances towards the songs that go off during his scene. Each time I watch it, he does something different, and it never fails to make me laugh. This is a character that I think the audience will really link well with because of this and I can't wait to see their reaction to his performance when it's due.

Milo as Brink

I would say that Milo has an 'average' interpretation of character for Brink. It's unfortunate that for each time I've seen him perform that he puts on a full Scottish accent and not even try to perform a Lanchashirian accent. I wish he would of spent much of his time on improving his accent work as I feel this will ruin the effectiveness of the scenes he appears in as it sounds 'off-putting'.

Another problem I have encountered with his interpretation is that he is still wearing the same clothes he normally wears. None of the clothing he wears as Brink is what people would of worn in the 1980's. Again, it's an unfortunate situation to occur and I think this is one of the things that will affect his overall grade.

The third and final problem is his hair style choice... it's still his original hairstyle. I feel that he should of really thought more about his characters portrayal as I don't see Brink, I still see him.

 

Looking at Refining Scenes and More Feedback:

 

For the day before we were to start running 'Road' from start to finish without stopping, we wanted to look at a few scenes to give them further refinement as we hadn't had many chances to witness the work that's been done on them.

 

Frankie and Brandon as Claire and Joey

 

We first went through Frankie and Brandon's scene as Claire and Joey. We initially wanted to see how far they would go in the monologue as they both havn't had many chances to work together and say the lines to one another. I found the scene to be a little choppy, there were quite a lot of moments where Frankie and/or Brandon had forgotten their lines and came out of character. However, I still found the scene to be very emotional, as it should be. I really did feel a connection between the two characters and I hope that the two actors will be able to work on this even more to make the scene much more effective in the mian performances.

 

A note which I had taken from Deborah's feedback was that Frankie needed to portray Claire looking "Desparate, Dizzy and Confused." This also needed to be apparent within her lines as well since, at present moment, she's just simply saying them without emotion or change of feeling.

 

Luke as Bisto

 

The scene with Bisto, as always, was excellently performed by Luke. He really does suit the character so well. I never found a moment where he was out of character, he just did his own thing and it came out to be a really funny watch. I think that the audience on the night of the show will get a real kick out of Bisto. His characteristics relate to the audience so well and this is mainly why he is one of my favorite characters in the whole play. Another reason is simply Lukes interpretation of him.

 

I had also taken note of a few more things that Deborah had mentioned as feedback to others:

 

Matt as Scullery

 

Deborah had found that Scullery wasn't very energetic for his moments on 'Road'. Since he is essentially meant to be portrayed as a sort of tour guide, Deborah would like Matt to be much more energetic for the full run-through, pretty much to Bisto's level.

 

Brandon as Joey

 

The lines need to be learnt! When Joey is shouting out the newspaper headlines, the words need to be expressed bigger than it is. I found it to maybe be a lack of confidnece, this would make sense as he hasn't really shown off the scene very much since we had started the project. Deborah also mentioned that he shouldn't appear to be tired all of the time, especially when announcing his lines, as it became very unentertaining to watch and it was hard to hear what he was saying half the time. 

 

Discussion about the First Full Run-Through of 'Road'

 

How did I feel?

 

I was very positive about the full run-through. I love to perform as Skin-Lad every chance I get, I enjoy bringing that strong sense of danger/terror into everbodies mind. I really do want them to think "Am I safe being close to this person?"

 

I'm happy to say that I did think of a few more things to add to my monologue, mainly to go closer to the audience a little bit more, but still not to overdo it.

 

Unfortunately, whilst performing the monologue, I had accidently stomped on top of Nyakeh's foot when I had said the line "Top of the Foot." This did make me come out of character completely and I lost the accent thereafter. Other than that, I thought that this was one of my worst performances as Skin-Lad. I hope that with a littole more practice throughout the sessions that I'll be able to fully enbody Skin-Lad in front of the audience to make the scene much more effective and terrifying.

 

How did I think everyone else did?

 

I thought that everyone during this session was fully commited to getting the work done, having all their lines learnt down to the teeth, although there were still a few hiccups. But we all helped eachother pull through, which is very good group work.

 

I still felt that this was one of the worst showbacks that each of us had done, possibly due to a lack of energy? It's definitley been better than this before, maybe it's just to do with going scene after scene.

 

More Feedback for the first Full Run-Through of 'Road'

 

Matt as Scullery

 

As always, Matt does perform to the best of his ability. Since the beginning of this project, he has had the accent down to the teeth and has helped others with the correct pronouciation of words. He has even helped me through my lines several times and I thank him for his contribution.

 

I did feel like there were moments where Matt may have lost the accent, but I overlooked this by his consistamnt humour as Scullery throughout the full run-through. He defintiely does give that persoanification of a tour guide; he relates well with people (audience or other characters), and he's never unfocused in his role.

 

Issie as Louise

 

Issie is very commited to her role as Louise, I've rehearsed in the same room as her several times and I'm really happy with her progression by giving constant compliments to her.

 

Out of everything, I found her accent work to be much better as time progresses, I thought that this session was one of her bests as Louise, specifically Scene 2 of 'Road' with her Brother. If there's anything that is affecting her performance it's that her face is being blocked by her hair half the time so I can't see what she's doing facially. Of course, at this moment, we're not fully in character as we're not all wearing our desired costumes, but I think that she could've made the little effort to do this just so we can see her face basically.

 

I had suggested for Scene 2 with Louise's Brother that there should be more pauses to create much more tension and it also shows the relationship between the brother and sister.

 

Jake as Louise's Brother

 

I had found Jake's performance in this role as "Good - Okay". I say this because, each time I've seen him perform, he doesn't really keep consistant with the accent, he would sometimes lose it completely half way through the scene. This has been a constant problem since the start of blocking, and I hope he works on this before the performance date is due.

 

Seeing as this is the only scene in the whole play with this character, I still think that Jake should try and show differences in his character, by form of physicalisation, to show the difference between this character, Blowpipe and Bald.

 

Phoebe as Carol

 

Phoebe has had the accnt mastered since the very beginning of the blocking process of 'Road' which is amazing! It was even done during the first read-through of 'Road' which is even more facinating... Has she done this accent before!?

 

Her physicalistion as Carol is excellent, one of the best I've seen out of anyone in the group. She really does come across as this sort of 'Bully' character, especially towards her mother, Brenda.

 

I don't feel as though there's anything to improve about her performance as Carol... Perhaps she could try having more bigger physicalised movements? It's up to her what she does, but I think she's already good to go for the real thing!

 

Hannah as Brenda

 

Hannah is another actor in the group which I feel is ready for the main performance. She has perfected both her physicalistion and vocalisation as Brenda.

 

She really does come across as this nagging old woman that Carol clearly despises of.

 

Milo as Brink

 

STILL SCOTTISH!!!

 

He's okay with his physicalisation as Brink, but him performing an entirely different accent than the rest of us just makes the whole performance overall look 'weird' to me. Some people have said it suits his character... But I don't think so. I personally think that it draws me away completely from the performance as it makes it look less 'real'.

 

I think that with hard work and determination that Milo can do so much more with Brink, especially when everyone gets up to dance in the final scene before the epilogue, as he just sits on the sofa for the whole of that moment looking like nothing is going on. I would find it much more funny if he had tried to dance with Carol but she just completely rejects him and they could have a rant or something whilst Eddie and Louise are calmly dancing the night away. It would show the relationship between the male and female characters so much better.

My Feedback for Skin-Lad

- Try not to kick people during the monologue (go into character too much clearly)
- Think of using other voices for characters mentioned within monologue
- "Pad, Pad, Pad" sounds Liverpool
- Work on the overall pace of the monologue
- Tension was brilliant!
- "I don't want to work at the engineering firm!" Great comedic moment
- Stare at the audience before I walk off stage
- Don't look confused for the last section of the monologue
- Be sure if I'm going to be pointing at one person in-particular or several