September 29, 2008
Weathering a Brainstorm
Over the past few weeks, I’ve been a bit busy and haven’t had the time or inclination to update The Director Sector regularly, with the exception of a few “here’s what i’m up to these days” posts. Now, though, I’m getting settled into Chicago and I’m ready to start thinking theatre again.
Last night, I discussed with a friend of mine some ideas for plays that I had in my head. After I finished my explanations, she said, basically, “What’s the point?”
So here’s my question of the day for you guys:
If you have to explicity explain the reasoning behind why you did what you did, or explicitly explain the moral or the lesson or whatever it is that you want the audience to take away from the play, should you even do the play at all? If they miss the point and walk away from the show confused, have you lost them?
The two ideas that I have don’t have traditional plots, per se, but are more experiments in messing around with time, space, and possibilities. They’re not about the characters, but more about whichever element I’m messing with at the moment.
Thoughts? Do you need more specific examples?
6 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
If you have to explicity explain the reasoning behind why you did what you did, or explicitly explain the moral or the lesson or whatever it is that you want the audience to take away from the play, should you even do the play at all? If they miss the point and walk away from the show confused, have you lost them?
Let me flip it around a bit. If this were a symphony, a collection of paintings, a ballet, or something other than theater, what would your answer be?
The “problem” with experimental plays is that (at least initially) you need to provide a context for understanding the piece. Without a way of getting the audience actively engaged, there is the risk of them getting lost - or worse, bored.
It’s like reading a mystery novel or watching a detective film. You need clues.
Comment by RVCBard — September 29, 2008 @ 7:56 am
Well, that’s the thing. I’m worried that they’ll miss the clues, but I DON’T want to give away the premise at the start. I’d rather that my audience figure it out themselves. On the other hand, I don’t want 5% of my audience to “get it” while the rest scratch their heads in confusion.
Comment by admin — September 29, 2008 @ 8:13 am
“…messing around with time, space, and possibilities.”
To what end? Is this just you noodling around with dramatic technique? If so, do it as an important exercise for yourself, but don’t subject an audience to it. Then, take what you’ve learned and apply it to something that matters to an audience.
There are things you have to do to learn, and those don’t need to be shared. The things to share are things that will matter to the audience. Unless they themselves are messing around with time, space, and possibilities — unless such messing around illuminates something important to their lives — then why should they care?
Comment by Scott Walters — September 29, 2008 @ 8:57 am
Obviously, I think it would be entertaining to an audience. The tough part is letting them in on the fun. Ideally, I’d like to approach this as more of a puzzle.
There is a series of conversations that are seemingly unrelated by a series of characters that are seemingly unrelated — what’s the connection?
If an audience came to simply be entertained, to laugh or cry, then they’re in for a disappointment. But if they can ask themselves questions and perhaps figure out the solution before the show is over, then I think it would be a lot more rewarding.
Comment by admin — September 29, 2008 @ 9:17 am
The best theatre should ask questions of its audience rather than trying didactically to teach them something. Better still, it should get the audience to ask the questions.
Comment by Hans — September 29, 2008 @ 1:10 pm
I think you need to ask why now? Why are you doing the play you are doing, when you are doing? The answer can be a whole range of things, but if you can’t answer it that might give you pause. Its a basic questions, but sometimes overlooked.
That will help you determine what Walters was talking about. Whether you are “noodling” around with structure for your own benefit or creating a piece that you want to present to an audience. The why now feeds into the question of whether the audience will care.
Comment by Dennis Baker — October 1, 2008 @ 7:04 am