One of the hardest things to do is listen well on stage.
Now, a nice thing about a blog -- no one interrupts me. I can talk and talk and talk and, no matter how irritating that talk might be, I get to finish. I get to play my dainty world view, spun on gossamer, all the way out, and back again. Nice, nice. Satisfying for folks with control issues (and if you think a former Stage Manager turned Director does not have control issues, you're insane.)
However, real life is not like that. Real life is full of conversations, conversations we can't control. These are rarely one-sided (in the manner of the delicious blog); conversations in life are a back and forth. And, if a conversation seems one-sided, remember it takes two to tango. The silent one is choosing to remain silent and in conversations on stage even more so because every conversation on stage is important, taking place at an important juncture -- or we wouldn't be seeing it. A moment on stage is never another-boring-bacon-and-eggs moment, even if they're just eating bacon and eggs. The moment presented is important to both or all characters involved, especially if the conversation seems banal.
So, I ask you, what are we often doing while another person is talking, say, at a dinner party. We are listening to the witty banter or funny anecdote, we are smiling, responding, but we are also thinking about what we are going to say. We almost always have an idea in our head of how we are going to respond. We have our own anecdote or witticism or story we want to tell. We are listening (passive) but involved in creating our next contribution to the conversation (active).
Now, most actors slip into a soley passive posture when listening on stage, especially when another character has a long monologue. I am not talking about the classic problem of 'phoning it in' (when an actor shuts down unless she is speaking) but I am talking more about the lack of forward energy when an actor is listening. Though the actor is present, engaged, attentive, maybe with an underlying attitude, the dominant stance is one of passivity.
However, if we consider that the listener would probably not be just sitting passively, if we think that the listener would actually choose to say something if given the opportunity, the process becomes more alive, more interactive, more interesting, more true. The long monologue, then, when more than one character is onstage, could be a kind of conversation. The speaker is telling his/her story or feelings or doing whatever she or he is trying to do -- but the listener is constantly reacting to the monologue because she/he has a story of her/his own, has something that she or he is trying to do. The listener is not allowed to speak -- there is no dialogue -- but her lack of speech can be as telling as speaking. Does she choose to not speak? Does she try to interject and get cut off by the monologuer? Is she dismissive of what the speaker has to say? Or is she devestated by what the speaker has to say?
Even if you have nary a line, ask yourself about your character's silence and what that character is doing with that silence. Remember, every time you are on stage, you are doing something; you are acting. Ask yourself basic questions for every scene, beat, moment, line, or silence:
What are you doing?
How are you doing it?
Who or what are you doing it to?
Try it next time the playwright was dumb enough not to give you something to say or do. Because your character definitely has something to say or do. Always. And silence can be as telling as telling.
They often say that what is not there is more important than what is. Except in a blog. Jacqui likes blogs. Blogs are yummy because they are all about me. Plays are yummy because they are not. Now, what do you think of that?
No comments:
Post a Comment