Uncanny

            I thought of the scene from Chicago where Billy Flynn and Roxie Hart are meeting with all of the reporters. “We Both Reached for the Gun” is a song where Flynn is feeding Roxie all of the things she needs to say to get the media on her side. When a couple of things she says are doing the opposite of that, Flynn takes over completely and there is a vast change in the scenery. Suddenly they are in a tiny little theatre and all of the reporters are puppets on strings and Roxie has turned into a ventriloquist dummy. Their makeup makes them look somewhat less than human. They also move in a very puppet-like manner which adds to the uncanniness of their appearance. This was certainly intentional. They are human enough that you still believe that they are people and that they are still their characters. But they are unhuman enough that you get the idea that they aren’t fully present in the moment. They don’t seem fully alive, if you will. Since they aren’t completely there, it is a bit of a jolt. It’s not necessarily creepy, but it is a little uncomfortable.  You get the sense that Billy Flynn is controlling all of their speech, thought, and movements.  He is the puppet master and they are the marionettes. Even though it’s obvious that they are still the actors that are portraying them, they do a very good job of appearing somewhat less than living.

            In this instance of the uncanny, humans are used to portray the lack of liveness. Surprisingly, this is very effective. In fact, in this case, I think that using humans with makeup, strings, and a specific type of movement is more effective than using puppets that just look like the actors. There is a certain amount of creepiness to ventriloquist dummies because they are so close to humans and I think that the point of the scene would have been lost if the audience was creeped out by the puppets. Instead, you’re reminded of the creepiness of dummies without actually being presented with something creepy. It gives you a certain impression of Billy Flynn that’s partially positive and partially negative. Here’s a clip of the scene from the movie:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9dFKRZ8EbU

Empathy

I believe that the first step to initiating change is to get the audiences back on our side.  I see a large distinction between people who go to the theatre to see something that is moving and makes them think and people who go to the theatre to be entertained. Sadly, the second group is a much bigger group of people. They tend to see the less entertaining, more thought provoking theatre as being strange and inaccessible. Theatre needs to find a way to reach the vast majority of people who are quite closed off to the type of theatre that wants to do something. I think that we need to find a way to make these performances more accessible to the people whose minds we want to change. If it makes them uncomfortable to the point that they aren’t interested in even going to the theatre, then we have lost them and also lost the battle. I do think that it’s important to make bold choices, let the audience feel uncomfortable, and even shock people in order to make a statement that could evoke change.  However, we must be careful not to exclude people. Currently, I see that the types of shows that are important in changing society are shows that only certain people want to see. And it seems that those certain people are the ones who are already thinking towards different types of change.

The second question is a difficult one. Of course there is a point where theatre is not as effective as other things with these huge issues. That being said, I do not think that it is ever not ever one of the answers. I strongly believe that different people are given different gifts and strengths and we are to use those to help other people and bring about change if we must. Therefore, that is the one way that some people have to begin to change the world. And I believe that it can be incredibly effective if it’s done in a way that can truly reach people.

Comment!

I commented on Brandon's blog!
http://bturn4130.blogspot.com/2014/11/explain-this-to-me-please.html?showComment=1415726399236#c278296982887446284

Protest

If I had to do a protest, I think that it would most likely have to do with abortion.  I’m pro-life and it’s one of the few social issues that I feel pretty educated about and have some strong opinions about.  I know that it’s a very touchy subject, so I would want to be extremely careful about how to handle it because I know that I would definitely have some disagreement.  Lauren talked about how some pro-life protesters handled the situation very poorly once.  So I would take some of what she said about that experience and try to approach it very differently.  I know that I would want an incredibly large group involved.  My desire would be for it to be very peaceful.  While my intention would be to discourage the women thinking of getting an abortion, I would want to do it in a way that caused them to feel supported rather than condemned.  We would gather outside an abortion clinic and attempt to have conversations with the women who are considering abortion.  We would not try to stop them or block their path physically.  We would just want to share the facts and the truth with them and explain to them the other options.  We would want them to know that they do have a choice that they get to make.  And to help them make the best and wisest choice that doesn’t include ending a life.

We would decide before the protest a certain time that it would begin and end.  Perhaps it would even take place once a week or twice a month or something like that.  I wouldn’t want to cause a big fuss or disturbance, but just open people’s eyes to the options that exist.

Comment!

I commented on Lauren's blog!!
http://laurengraham512.blogspot.com/2014/10/blog-post-8.html?showComment=1414729222734#c7619434633239652637

Time!

I was absolutely intrigued by the comparison of the everyday use of Twitter to theatre.  It was very interesting to imagine how much of a performance it is to use Twitter.  The single tweet plays seemed less like theatre to me and applied less to this idea of real time.  However the really long plays and the Twitter plays that took place over weeks definitely brought some sense of reality that a “normal” play wouldn’t quite be able to capture.  I found that especially the Twitter plays where different characters were tweeting different thing almost as if they were using Twitter were an excellent illusion of reality.  It would be very easy for these characters to turn into some of the “friends” that a person follows on Twitter.  It works well because Twitter is already set up as a form of performers and audience (even though those lines are a bit blurred and the audience and performers are constantly trading places).

I’m not sure how well it could work to take this idea of the Twitter plays to the next step, but I imagine a live performance of Twitter.  What I mean is using Twitter as a script.  I feel like it would actually end up turning into one of the durational plays though.  In order to create the reality of Twitter, characters’ conversations must take place over a drawn out period of time.  There also must be many different characters that sometimes interact with one another and sometimes do not.  I think that the inclusion of several random celebrities who don’t really interact with anyone else very much would be fun.  Then it would be performed over several hours to mimic somebody reading through a Twitter feed.  People would be welcome to come and go as they please, similar to the longer plays.  Perhaps there could be some audience interaction as well such as posting tweets that would appear in the play.

Environmental Theatre

Alright, so I love musicals and any time I get to put on my director hat and choose a production that I'd love to see come to life, it will most assuredly be a musical.  For this one, I chose the musical Godspell.  I would want it to take place in a busy outdoor environment such as the quad or a popular park.  The characters would be dressed as ordinary people (including the part of Jesus) and would interact with audience members as if they were audience members themselves.  All of the music would be sung acapella.  Obviously, this production would take place in a found space.  There would be no set brought in and props would be minimal.  Focus would be multi-focus most of the time.  And as for the text, it wouldn't be the entire show that we'd be doing.  Only the parts that would be relevant to Jesus interacting with his disciples (which would be the actors as well as the audience.)
The reason I chose this show and this sort of environment is because I would like to mimic what it was like when Jesus was actually on earth interacting with his followers.  When he would speak, a crowd would gradually form around Him and His disciples.  My hopes would be that a similar thing would happen with this production.  I think it would greatly enhance the show to have it set in a modern day version of history.
As for Kantor's quote, I would have to say that I disagree.  I believe that when we are expecting things to happen, they are always much more likely to happen.  If I attend class expecting it to be boring, it almost always is.  If I attend a movie expecting to hate it, I usually will.  If I go to church expecting to encounter God, I usually find myself more likely to than when I don't expect anything.  I believe the same is true with theatre.  Most of the time, when I attend a theatrical production that I expect to be good, I am impressed.  On the other hand, if I expect the opposite, I'm usually not surprised.  I believe that expectations have quite a lot to do with the results.