This is something I think about a lot as an actor. (Do I get to say that without sounding too pretentious?)
Yes, a large part of my job is to construct a conception of character that can drive action and reaction forward in a compelling way... a character who can want things, a character who naturally acts one way and not another. And "advocating" for that character is a big part of that.
But that's not my only job, because a play is a collaborative effort. Another large part of my job is to participate in relationships with the other characters on stage. And a third large part is to support the director's vision of the narrative arc of the scene.
Or, to say that with more parallel construction: yes, character advocacy is important, but so is relationship advocacy, and so is story construction, and sometimes they are in tension.
So, sometimes it has to run backwards. Sometimes I have to say "Well, what I want to do is X, but I'm going to Y" (because the script says so, because it gives someone else a chance to shine on stage,
( ... )
Of course you get to say that without sounding pretentious; you put up with me saying 'As a filmmaker' a lot, after all :)
Thanks for commenting; it was an interesting read (obvious statement about Dave's comments is obvious?) and gave me some things to think about which will probably turn into a longer comment once I'm done with this session's writeup.
Giving this some more thought... 100m-Bobby in particular was an odd blend of "character advocacy" type handling and omnipotent-player type handling, where as the omnipotent handler I threw an endless series of crises at his head -- personal crises, emotional crises, relationship crises, comic-book supervillains, soap-opera melodrama, physical trauma, whatever I could think of -- and then turned around and let him cope (or, sometimes, fail to cope) with them as a character.
I kind of like how that worked out, in retrospect.
Comments 6
Yes, a large part of my job is to construct a conception of character that can drive action and reaction forward in a compelling way... a character who can want things, a character who naturally acts one way and not another. And "advocating" for that character is a big part of that.
But that's not my only job, because a play is a collaborative effort. Another large part of my job is to participate in relationships with the other characters on stage. And a third large part is to support the director's vision of the narrative arc of the scene.
Or, to say that with more parallel construction: yes, character advocacy is important, but so is relationship advocacy, and so is story construction, and sometimes they are in tension.
So, sometimes it has to run backwards. Sometimes I have to say "Well, what I want to do is X, but I'm going to Y" (because the script says so, because it gives someone else a chance to shine on stage, ( ... )
Reply
Thanks for commenting; it was an interesting read (obvious statement about Dave's comments is obvious?) and gave me some things to think about which will probably turn into a longer comment once I'm done with this session's writeup.
Reply
Reply
I kind of like how that worked out, in retrospect.
Reply
Leave a comment