Excuses…
My latest book analysis is late, but I assure you that this post required the proper amount of time to figure out what I am now capable of sharing with you. I mentioned in my initial post discussing mnemonic that I had never done collaborative theater, and that I was intrigue by the possibility and promise this work represented as a learning experience for me. What I discovered in the past two weeks extends far beyond the pages of this interesting and multi-faceted work. This past week I had the great pleasure to participate in a workshop at the American College Theater Festival titled simple: Alternative Forms.
The concept of this workshop was to pair playwrights with actors with the intent of staging a show in four days, then simply wait and see what happens. Unlike with the 24 hour playwriting model, where there is an very tight time frame that requires the generation of SOMETHING in less than 8 hours, this workshop encouraged writers and actors alike to experiment with different styles of theater, and to collaborate on the final product that ended up on the stage.
One of my fellow playwrights participating in this workshop wrote a Lincoln Douglas style debate on the inherent qualities of pie. (The dessert, not the mathematical sign.) Another gentleman wrote a poem on how choices effect the path our lives take, and had a single actress act out the imagery as she recited the piece. I ended up taking a page out the Complicite handbook from my recent reading of mnemonic, and approached the workshop as a collaborative writing opportunity to better understand just how this process can possibly work and whether or not I would appreciate the quality of the product without having the ability to completely control what ends up on the stage from start to finish. The answer to these questions , and more, follows…
The Review…
Here are some of the things that I took away from the initial reading: the play discusses the nature of life, and the interconnectedness that we as a species share amongst one another. Through the use of symbolic theatrical devices the Complicite company evokes a sense of history and solidarity in our collective pasts. This is accomplished by discussing the nature of memory, and how the human brain goes about creating and retaining memories. The text of the play describes the process of the human brain triggering synapses and building bridges between different pieces of tissue and cells in order to develop a structure of synaptic pathways that connect our consciousness to our memories.
The play presents memory as a thing that continually grows over time through a series of branch points that results in an ever expanding series of connections that resemble the veins in a maple leaf. (This description was very theatrical and struck me as an interesting explanation. As a result of reading this play I am inspired to discuss this topic in greater deal with my good friend Dr. Craig Bennett who is a cognitive neuro-scientist doing his post doctoral work on this topic at the University of California in Santa Barbara.)
Following on this theme of interconnectedness, the play goes on to suggest that there is a connection between each and every person living and dead on the earth. This metaphorical connection laid the ground-work for a relationship between humankind today and a 5,000 year old corpse of an Ice Man discovered in the Alps near Bolzano Italy in 1991 by a group of hikers.
Using the Ice Man’s experiences as a model for human behavior, the company takes the reader on a journey of discovery that connects each of us to the struggle for survival that is depicted through the analysis of the Ice Man’s collected remains. Complicite employs the scientific and news media discourse on the Ice Man discovery through out this work to connect each of the disparate characters to one another by suggesting that if we can understand the Ice Man, we are able to learn more about humanity and the way we live. This is the through-line that holds the show together.
The major themes covered in this play include the importance of understanding humanity’s place in the world, and recognizing how we’re all connected: past, present, and future. The play spends a great deal of time analyzing the importance of ancestry and knowing where we come from. In the course of expounding on the relationship between the two major characters in this piece, Virgil and Alice, we come to understand that despite the difference in time, place and experiences of Alice, her father, and the Ice Man… we see that the journey’s taken in life by these three individuals are in many ways connected, and represent all of us.
Many of the important themes included in this play are universal by nature. The broad sweeping concepts that are discussed in the text result in the play feeling like it lacked a sense of purpose. During my initial reading of the script I was turned off by the lack of a cohesive message. As a collaborative work you can see the devices used to hold together the many pieces that act as the heart of this play. The question one must ask, as you read, is whether or not it holds up. Has the company has found a way to strike a balance between the theme of human interconnectedness and the many unique stories that are told in the course of the text? It is my contention that this is a very theatrical work, that on stage would showcase a very interesting set of ideas and make for an interesting evening of theater, but on the page it feels like it’s missing something.
It took me two weeks to come to this conclusion. My initial reaction was that this play had no soul, rambled, and ultimately left me feeling unfulfilled after the introduction of so many powerful ideas. I’m sharing this with you so that you can appreciate how much a writer can be changed by participating in a collaborative writing process, and staging the product of such an event.
ACTF and Collaborative Writing…
At the American College Theater Festival for region five, held this year at the University of Kansas, I participated in the “Alternative Forms” workshop. In the course of this experience I was giving the opportunity to work with a group of actors in order to create something non-traditional to be put on stage for our showcase night on Thursday, 1/22/09. It was a three day event that really changed my perspective on this play, and on the process of collaborative development. I had two important realizations: 1) You can’t fully control the product of what ends up on stage if there isn’t one person completely in control of the script, and I really don’t like being able to completely control what goes into something that has my name on it. 2) It was a lot of fun to feel out of control for a little while. (This is particularly difficult for someone who is just a little bit O.C. to admit and mean it.)
I may end up choosing to do something like this again because it was such a unique experience, but I did feel out of my element, and had to adjust my approach to the writing process around what others had given me. In our groups collaboration I tried to steer us away from a 24 hour play fest style script writing and actor staging situation. I took input from the group, had them write stories from their lives, and we discussed the concept that was to act as the central theme of our piece. I took copious notes during out development meeting, collected the actors written stories, then went off to create a composition that included all of these components into something worthwhile. It was really challenging, and the initial reading of that work was stale, stilted, and really didn’t work. I took notes during the reading, had a follow-up meeting with the cast, and we made some hasty decisions on line delivery and organization of the dialogue. I then went away again with news notes, ripped apart my original draft and turned it into something that flowed better and felt like a unified experience that had the potential to connect with our audience more effectively.
I wasn’t entirely happy with the final product… but what writer is ever completely satisfied? Once our piece had it’s moment under the lights on stage I felt like we had done very well under the circumstances. My actors were very talented, and did a great job of contributing to the development process, and gave impressive performances after little to no rehearsal time.
Participating in this workshop certainly opened my eyes to the challenges of collaborative theater, but it also help me see how these shows challenge audiences, and offer a truly theatrical experience that is designed for the stage, and not for the page. As a playwright it’s good to be reminded every once and while that theater is collaborative even if the writing process usually is not. This was a wonderful experience and despite my misgivings I would recommend it to anyone who brands themselves a playwright.