LESSON THREE - '27|3|13' - 'Berkoff - Lunch'

As we want to do two more performances by the end of the year, we knew that this one would be approaching fast. Sir decided that if he gave us the script now we'd be able to incorporate anything we learn in small workshops into our performance.

We were given the script 'Lunch' written by Steven Berkoff himself. Altogether it is about 20 minutes long, but we only need to do at least 12 - 15 minutes of it. The plot is of a chance meeting of a man and woman at a beach, and the thoughts behind the physical attraction, that leads them to talk and engage in more promiscuous thoughts and actions on a beach. This play is very contrasting to 'The Pillowman' as it is definitely more light-hearted and the comedy is meant to be surface rather than an uncomfortable humour that was present for the black comedy we did for Stanislavsky.

Another reason we were receiving in this script is there is a clear sense of duality in the lines. We decided the submissive and dominate duality would be good to play on, as that allows the movement to reflect the feelings of either shy or confident character. Having two people play one person means not only can there be physical interaction between the person's thoughts but the man and woman and gives a chance for dominate and submissive to clash in an entertaining way to produce humour and interest into the thoughts of everyday civilians as they meet by chance.

The Cast: 

Woman: 

     Poppy (Me)    

                                                       

 Ciara Woodcock

Man:

                                         Matt Goodband   

                                           Jake Bower

                 
                                                   


As Jake was missing during this lesson, myself Matt and Ciara decided to go through the script and split the Man and Woman's lines up into the categories of submissive and confident. For this we looking at chances where the submissive character could be pushed away for comedic effect, and the submissive to take over with their confident and over sexualised view of the other person.

It was decided that Me and Matt would play the submissive parts and Jake and Ciara the confident parts. This is based on what takes our personal appeal and seemed to fit better.

The scene starts of with the woman sat on a bench looking over at the sea, and the man entering from backstage, me and Ciara would do synchronised movements that resemble the emotion we are portraying. This allows the audience to engage with the characteristics of the emotions immediately whilst the man battles with his own idea's of the woman's physical appearance. Matt attempted to define between the two personalities without Jake by changing his posture and his vocal intonation, and made the pitch lower to resemble a smooth sexualised tone.

Next week, when Jake returns we will be able to develop the first page more adding in more of Berkoff's methods of physical movement. 

LESSON TWO - 20|3|13 - 'Berkoff Research'

Steven Berkoff:

Born in London (1937), he studied drama and mime in London and Paris entering a series of repertory companies before forming himself: ‘The London Theatre Group’ in 1968. His plays have had many adaptations meaning they’ve been performed in a variety of countries, in many languages. He starred, directed and toured many adaptations such as: Agamemnon after Aeschlylus, Poe’s The Fall of the House of Usher, Shakespeare’s Coriolanus, playing title roles such as Richard II, Hamlet and Macbeth. Some of his own plays include ‘East, West, The Secret Love Life of Ophelia and Decadence. Berkoff was well known for playing evil characters, which he said ‘all the best actors took on the roles of the villains’

Berkoff used a challenging style of physical theatre more commonly known as ‘total theatre’. He is well known for being one of the ‘major minor contemporary dramatists in Britain.’ Berkoff focused on theatre of self-performance, which intersects between the public and the artist.

Berkoff’s plays often have very metaphorical linguistic twists that enable the actor to consider every height or depth imaginable to create meaningful language. He takes language and creates a roller coaster which the actor can take the audience on for a more unique performance. This could be by continuously juxtaposing between fact and fiction, euphemism and dysphemism, but Berkoff also juxtaposes the opposing worldviews the characters in the play might obtain. The character can often have a fabricated nature particulary in the way of perceiving reality which is suddenly made manifest to the audience which recognise the way the language is being put across contrast with either true meanings or what they know.

The effect most of Berkoff’s plays have is that continual uncertainty of significance. He is able to question the audiences belief with his language and perception the characters have as a vehicles of accurate communication and somewhat universal truth.

There is not only a very detailed language style - but the physical side is very exaggerated. It is a stylized mime, exaggerating the facial expressions. It allows the actor to externalise internal emotions while using third person address, rising up ideas of subconscious thoughts or subtext. Rhythm is used through the voice and body to create a emphasise every moment with thought, this allows a more abstract performance of the voice and ensemble where there is physicalisation of objects because this pushed the boundaries of his performances. 

Some of Berkoff’s main influences are Laurence Olivier, Edmund Kean, Bertolt Brecht, Antonin Artaud and Jean Louis-Barrault.

LESSON ONE - 6|3|13 - 'Berkoff's Physical Movement Workshop'

After finishing 'The Pillowman' and very naturalistic piece that can use many of Stanislavsky's acting methods, we are now going to look at the contrasting practitioner 'Steven Berkoff' and use one of his scripts to create a short 15 minute performance.

For the first lesson after doing Pillowman, we were told that this was a contrast to naturalistic movements. Where Stanislavsky has realistic gestures and movements, we were going to focus on the extreme of robotic movements.

The first exercise we did was in pairs and we had to re-enact setting up and eating a meal in synchrony. Working with Ciara we decided to follow the process and make are arm movements follow the rigid pattern of raising the elbow first then lifting the hand to place cutlery and drinks. This creates a jerky effect and is also easier to mimic each other as we only had a short amount of time to do this. This is very different to a naturalistic way of setting out a table because the robotic effect allows an image for the audience to interpret and is more aesthetically interesting to watch as the most simplest task is performed in a more visually pleasing way.

The second activity was adding words with movement. We were explained that every movement must express the correct feeling and emotion. In Berkoff's work we are removing any sign of subtext and everything had to be defined. We were told to create a conflict scenario that lasted about 30 seconds to 1 minute. We had to say the thoughts or words whilst actions were being performed. We also had to keep the robotic movement. My partner was Jake, we started off with him punching me, all the movement that we did was actually done with about a metre between us, and there was no actually physical contact between either of us during any part. Whilst doing the punch shouted 'jaw' to show his thought was of his aim. I said 'shock' to highlight this was unexpected. I returned a slap to Jake whilst spitting the word 'twat' to emphasise that the feeling my character had negative feelings towards Jake. Then he acted out reaching for my hair, and I showed the reaction and made bitter noises of pain. I received feedback that this part was too naturalistic, even if it was the reaction without contact, and I understand that the movement or sound I had made could've been more direct with the pain I was feeling. 

The final activity we had to do was to create a piece of movement that could be looped, working in a group of four. It had to resemble a gang. Working with Kelly, Jake and Chris. We made a sharp robotic walk that went forward 3 steps before squatting down on count 4, by using counts were able to create a systematic pattern that made it easier for everyone to follow and getting a slicker performance. Once squatted we pretended to grab and sniff some dirt, this could be a sign that we are a gang defending territory, we then turned and sat down so are bodies were facing the opposite direction and in a position that was easy for us to stand up and start the movement again.

Although this was all we had time to create within the lesson it was great to see the potential to add some dialogue about being in a gang whilst keeping the systematic movement, or even making it into a canon movement and have a series of intertwining monologues. Even if we just had a script and read it, having the piece of movement that's not naturalistic we are able to a more visually dynamic performance that is more entertaining rather than connecting the emotions to the audience.