Saturday, November 23, 2013

Male/Female Characters - what is the deal Commedia?

Thoughts on male/female commedia characters and Colombina from Dory of Tut'Zanni ensemble:

During our last meeting we discussed our view of male and female when it comes to commedia and we don't think it is so clear in today's society. Instead, for us, it is best to look at the masks as masculine or feminine energies. So a woman in a mask with masculine energy will play as a woman with what would be considered typical or traditional "male attributes". For example, Pantalona with money and power, Dottore pregnant with knowledge or Magnifica horny and rich. Even before I knew I was pregnant, I had this idea of the pregnant Dottore. It seems so fitting, since pregnant women and mothers know EVERYTHING and are so willing to talk and talk and give many an advice whether this helps your or not. In the same vein, you look at Colombina, the voice of reason, as a feminine energy. We decided to give this task to Patrick for our current show. He does not play a woman but more of an effeminate male and I think he has harnessed the true energy of Colombina much more than any of the women in our ensemble ever have. ALi always takes on the task of the male servant characters Zanni, in which she only uses Grammalot, and Pulcinella, a completely silent straight character against Liam's over the top Capitano. Her energy is very playful and not traditionally feminine so these characters work in her body.

Arlecchino, on the other hand, is a challenge to play as a woman. Arlecchino is traditionally a very clown like character, living in his own plane of understanding the world, the way a child understands it except with the sexuality of an adolescent who is always hungry for it... coming directly from the idea of the Italian "mammone" or "momma's boy" he is fun and fancy free. This is hard to portray as a woman because girls tend to mature faster than boys, we have a lot more to prove to the world, so a young girl would be the Colombina not the Arlecchino. This is what I find difficult about it... not impossible but difficult.

But the opposite is true with Strega. She is extremely difficult for a man to pull off. There is a Mago character but usually he is extremely clumsy and dim witted. But Strega is THE strong woman character in traditional commedia. Unlike Colombina who can sometimes cleverly pull a rues or use her womanly form to gain power, Strega IS powerful and strikes fear in the hearts of the other characters. Whether or not her powers are real don't really matter because through her own persuasive, all-powerful nature, she has convinced these characters in this world that her magic is very real and they believe as well as follow through. This makes her the true feminist character. No one would be scared of a man in this way... He would have to prove his power over and over again.

We chose to mask our Colombina because everyone on stage was in mask. When you looked at it in a group as in our final scene, without the mask she was lost and aesthetically it looked strange. It is also important to distinguish Colombina from the innamorati, distinguishing her status because she is the voice of reason but she is still a servant. Whereas a little more flamboyant character like her slightly sluttier counterpart Smeraldina is a little closer to the innamorati in character. Less deep I should say. Though I think it is very possible to play Colombina without mask when innamorati are involved, while being careful not to get her character swept up in the dramatic movement of the other characters.

For the audience this worked well. The most important rule in commedia is not the sexes but the drives. Whether it is a Magnifico or a Magnifica they are driven by money, sex and power or Dottore who is driven by knowledge, food and drink - for Dottore sex is like food so they are one in the same. If you keep the inherent needs of each character and don't betray the mask (this applies to the age of the mask for instance - you cannot play Magnifico or Magnifica as a young man/woman or ugly man/woman because he/she is obviously old) you will keep the integrity of the true nature of commedia.

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

It'll be a bit of a ramble...

I'm just going to go ahead and write my reflections. It'll be a bit of a ramble, but if I don't just do it now, it'll never get done. - ALi



My Reflections on our Chicago times:

  • I really love our process. We all take a moment of our completely separate lives, and collide them in a sort of crazy, manic span of 1 or 2 weeks, and then put the result in front of people to see what they think. For me, as a performer, it acts as sort of a conservatory-type training session. I don't have a week in between each meeting to sort of let everything settle. I have to learn it (or re-learn it), do it, and grow it all at once. A big advantage I think comes from this is that it forces it into my body before I can intellectualize it. 
  • The workshops were great fun. I always learn so much more by having to teach. The students were all willing to say "yes", and we were able to cover a lot of ground. 
  • The show came together much more smoothly than I could have anticipated. Intended to be a work-in-progress, it ended up being full show length, and covered a huge portion of the plot. It flowed quite smoothly, and we found moments to play. We had an engaged and supportive audience, and that makes me want to give as much as I can. 
  • I was really glad we took a leap of faith and tried our street-style performance, with us sitting alongside the audience. It helped me feel supported by my teammates while I was on stage, and feel even more of a part of it as an observer. I was surprised to receive some feedback that the audience enjoyed it as well. They seemed to feel as though it gave them more permission to laugh and cheer and participate. Also, they can tell that we are truly improvising when we all crack up at something new! 
  • All in all, I believe Chicago was a huge success.The people were great, and we were accommodated brilliantly. We had a lot of support being there, and that helped so much. (We are already looking into when we can get back!) Nothing can top when we all get together in a fury of last-minute panic, and the irresistible want to play!

Sunday, March 24, 2013

The Art of Failing

Teaching an art form is a process (duh!): not only the teaching and learning, but also figuring out what to teach.

When it comes to Commedia, with its rich history (and mysterious, since since the form pretty much died), that story grows more interesting and complicated.

How do you introduce students to this wild world called Commedia?
Do you start with the history (probably too boring), with discipline (probably not that inspiring), with humor (fun but where is the weight of the form), with improv (also fun but not the whole picture), with the physicality (too much training), with imaginative play//lazzi (great fun but takes time to retrain the brain), with chaos (often confusing)…

How do you lay the ground work so that students are interested, excited and understanding the full scope of Commedia?
I mean, it is pretty complicated. I guess, you begin to look for the hook. What will get an artist all excited about learning a new form? One answer: if they feel successful. Remember this is only an introduction.

Success is a funny idea, not haha. When we (Tut'Z) were training in Commedia, failure was essential. We had to learn how to fall flat on our faces day after day (and find the joy in it). Failure is the key to success. When I stepped into a Commedia workshop this past weekend, I was expecting failure to be on the menu. The weird thing, it wasn’t there. The instructor was working triple hard to make sure that we all walked away feeling successful. He would give us lines, he would provide us with scenarios, he would give us the walks, he would give us the characters, he would direct us (like we were his puppets on strings), and never once was there a dull moment.

After the first day, I was really annoyed. I thought he was too prescriptive in his Commedia – truthfully, he would give us the option of freedom but when we faltered he would step in to hold us up which I took as him trying to tell us how it should be done. Really, he was making sure we had a good time. However, in making sure we were all enjoying ourselves, he took away our creativity, our chaos, our terror, our fear, our everything-one-needs to be in the moment. To me, he took away the Commedia.

I stepped up to do a 3 person scene, and took on Tartaglia. I’m not so good at T, but I wanted to try it. While we were up, he kept tossing things at me. I did not know whether to follow my impulses or to follow the direction. I just kept stammering (like T), because everything was mixed up. I was trying to be present, but did not know how to navigate what I wanted to do and what I was supposed to do. I started trying to do both – which meant that it was a huge FLOP. It kind of felt great. I love a flop. It feels terrible but the kind of terrible to get up and try again.

This got me thinking. What is important for
Commedia? What do you introduce first, second, third? How do you bring the person up to speed and the imagination into play and the character into the body? You have so many elements you need to do at once – what is the order you choose?

I learned, never allow the need to succeed take the place of failure. Failure is so important in this form. The way you improve is through a complicated exploration of failure. There is no right or wrong. There is no perfect character or Commedia. We don’t really know how it was done 300 years ago – we are making it up. Fail, in order to succeed.

written by: Patrick Berger