LAB 4 - Duet for One

Sunday 7 December 2008

Toady was the fourth LAB – and the last one before 2009!

We started the session by preparing the written tasks (the ones that Tanya set last session) for performance. Instantly the tone of the day was set – as everyone had created some fantastic work, and it was really good to see it come alive.

We then read a section of the script which focussed on what Stephanie (the central character in the play) has lost due to her illness (she suffers from MS) – her ability to play the violin and ultimately her Music. The script also explored the role that parents play in shaping the future of their children. Stephanie had a very supportive mother (who died young) and a less supportive father. But his lack of support encouraged her to prove him wrong and make a success of her music. This lead to a discussion about parental pressure verses parental support; and whether anyone felt that their parents lived their lives though them, or were trying not to repeat their own mistakes with them.

We also talked about how we would feel if something we valued was from us, like our ability to play an instrument, our career, or even the physical abilities we take for granted – and whether it important, or not, to be optimistic and put a positive spin on a difficult situation. We played the 'No... Yes and... Yes but...' game to explore the idea of blocking an idea or going with it. Most people found it easier to use 'Yes but' than saying 'No'. Participants were then asked to think about something that they have lost (or would hate to loose) and to find an object to represent this. They then created physical monologues to express this loss (i.e. coming up with five of six actions or movements that could be repeated). They then taught these to one another, without communicating verbally, so that everyone had a new, inherited loss that was no longer personal to them. They then worked on creating verbal monologues to accompany their new inherited loss, expressing this sense of loss, but potentially giving it a whole new meaning. Again, the results were extremely positive and creative. Lots of ideas were generated for Tanya (we clearly have talented writers in the group); and we also worked on staging the pieces too.

Next we worked on how you might communicate your loss to an audience - and how we might share our secrets/problems/fears – through counselling, writing a diary, praying to God? We started with a fun, physical warm-up. In groups, participants had 10 seconds to physically create a mode of communication, using their bodies and working together as one, from a message in a bottle to a diary; and a PC to a mobile phone. We then asked participants to work alone, or in pairs, to create a short piece to illustrate how they might share their anxieties and problems. Some chose to confide in friends; others to talk in chat rooms anonymously; others in writing or though other art forms like painting or singing. Again, so fantastic work was generated - everyone is really stepping up to the challenge and pushing themselves to create exceptional work.

Finally, we returned to discussing music and its importance to us. Some people felt that they would be completely lost with out it - it has therapeutic value, it lets you unwind and de-stress, it is emotive, it helped you concentrate, it entertains etc. We then also asked everyone to name two tracks that they love, and Tanya is going to put together a LAB soundtrack for next session. She also set everyone two tasks for the January LAB. Firstly, anyone who has a special talent - be it singing, dancing, writing poetry, playing an instrument etc - they should prepare something to share with the group next time; and secondly – find two adverts that show a young person looking to change their lives in some way.

LAB 3 - In a Dark Dark House

Sunday 2 November 2008

The first exercise of the day was actually a continuation of an idea that emerged from LAB Two – the concept of child brides. To provoke political debate, Raz and Maryam created a scene last session between a 40 year old man and an 11 year old girl who were in a relationship. So… we put a series of photographs on the wall, all depicting child brides, and the group were asked to complete a character profile worksheet for one the brides from one of the pictures.

See some of the pictures at the following website:
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2006/07/06/magazine/20060709_BRIDES_SLIDESHOW_1.html
From this, they then worked in groups to generate questions that the issue of child brides raises in their minds (direct or rhetorical). For each question, they then generated three more questions that were prompted by the initial questions (creating nine questions)… and then three more for each of these questions (now 27 questions)… We then discussed any broad, general themes that these questions suggested.

Some of the Questions raised:
Is this / Am I normal?
-What is normal?
-Does this happen everywhere?
-Am I supposed to enjoy this?
-What do we mean by ‘this’?
-Why would anyone enjoy it?

Why would a 40 year old man want to be with a child?
-Was the 40 year old abused as a child?
-Is there money involved?
-Does he enjoy this?
-Sexually or psychologically abused?
-Social or business gain?
-Is he a paedophile?
-Are his actions legal?
-Does he get a thrill out of it?
-Is it natural for him?

How did the concept of child brides become acceptable?
-Has it always acceptable?
-What is meant by acceptable?
-Does anyone refute it?
-Is it a cultural thing?
-Is it tradition?
-Is it ingrained into society?

Could you learn to love your older husband?
-Is the child being deprived of their childhood?
-How would you be able to cope?
-Would you use your imagination to escape?

What culture is making these rules?
-Is it down to religion?
-Does the man have the right to control?
-Is a woman the object of a man?

After the break, some people were asked to write monologues from the perspective of their child bride; some completed a newspaper exercise, Commenting on Child Brides, using an article on child brides as stimulus; and the remaining group improvised a short scene between a parent and his young son who he caught having underage sex.

The scenes were great. Jess wrote a fantastic, but disturbing, monologue from the perspective of a four year old boy who had an unnatural relationship with an adult male. Aisha wrote a piece from the perspective of a child bride who had more in common with her husband’s children, of the same age, than with him; and Yasemin performed an interesting piece from the perspective of a 19 year old woman who had escaped from an arranged marriage with a much older man.

Girls – why not share your monologues on the BLOG?

After lunch, we read Act Two of In a Dark Dark House. The issue of child brides provided the perfect segue into the scene between Terry, who is in his late 30s, and Jenny, who is a 15 year old girl. We read the scene and discussed the behaviour of both characters in the scene – why was Jenny flirting with an older man? And why was Terry interested in someone half of his age? We also talked about what might’ve come before this scene and what might have come after. The group then divided into pairs and worked on an improvised scene assuming that something illicit had happened between Jenny and Terry. They were asked to create a scene either between Jenny and her psychiatrist, or between Terry and a criminal psychologist / policeman. Next, we took the same scene and, working in groups of four, two people were asked to play the actual lines of the characters and the other two were asked to play aloud the subtext – what were the characters actually meaning or implying through their words even if they weren’t saying it directly?

We finished the day thinking not only about the repercussions of abuse (for Terry) but also about the effect that a common or shared experience can have on siblings – after all, up until the last moment of the play, Terry and Drew appear to have experienced the same ordeal. In pairs, participants were asked to script a short scene between siblings who have a shared experience and demonstrate how this experience has influenced their relationship and the way that they behave towards each other.

Pairs then swapped scripts so that they were not working with their own words but were asked to interpret the words of others in order to play the relationship between the siblings.

All in all – another really good session. And as always, we could have done with another few hours to continue exploring the ideas that we were beginning to touch on.

And finally… Tanya set some very specific tasks for individuals and pairs in the group:

Alex – to research the legal classification of a paedophile Grace – to research who the clients are of the young Chinese prostitutes in Britain (see http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/oct/11/immigration-people-trafficking).
Shanice – to research the Romeo and Juliet law.
Desara – to research exactly what young boys are getting up to, if this is all about young brides…
Romany / Jess – write a scene set in an internet chat room between an 11 year old child bride from a different country and an 11 year old in Britain.
Yasemin / Aisha – write a scene where a 12 year old girl has a closer relationship with her husband’s 13 year old son than she does with him.
Louie / Maryam – write a scene between two friends – one is very confident and ‘beyond her years’ and the other is quite shy and not as advanced emotionally as her friend.
Chloe / Layla – write a scene between a mother (who was herself a child bride) and her daughter (who is soon to be one).
Mollie - what about the husband? Write a monologue from the perspective of a 40 year old man married to a child.
Naomi - write a name poem for Aisha Camara (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/africanlives/ivory/ivory.htm).

Pius - write a name poem for Mwaka (http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/Courses/so142/News_stories/Child_Marriage_in_Africa.html).

Hannah - write a name poem for Beatrice.

Darshanie - write a name poem for Nojoud Mohammed Ali (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7351336.stm).

Razvan - write a monologue for Ms Muanyongo - what has she had to endure?

Ilmi - you are the son of a man who has three wives. The newest wife is 11 years old - the same age as you. How does this make you feel? Write a monologue to express your feelings (you will also need to decide what country/culture you are from).

Post your findings / scenes on the BLOG – or email them to Tanya.

LAB 2 – Waste

Sunday 12 October 2008

We discovered today that Waste is such a fantastic play for generating debate and discussion. We talked lots – about the following – and more:

- What does it mean to be a man / woman today?
- Abortion – does a woman have the right to choose?
- Politics – what concerns us politically today?

We began the day by celebrating the name, but instead of using our own names, we used the names of the characters that we created in LAB 1. Again – some interesting poems were generated. Please share them with us!

We then had a lengthy discussion about what people like / didn’t like / got out of seeing Waste. There were only 3 people in the group who didn’t manage to see the play and so they took part in an exercise where they were asked to rearrange the plot headlines in chronological order.

We then read selected excerpts from the play – the two scenes between Amy O’Connell and Henry Trebell – and then discussed the scenes before creating a Jerry Springer-style performance entitled, A Woman’s Right to Choose. Using Amy and Henry’s story as a starting point, participants were encouraged to bring on fictional characters to represent opposing view points. Again, this fuelled a powerful debate.

After lunch, we talked briefly about Henry Trebell’s political beliefs. He was an independent politician proposing a radical bill to disestablish the church. But he also passionately believed in educational reform – and giving power to the children. As a group, we talked about what concerned us politically, before dividing into pairs and deciding on a political issue to discuss further. Rather than performing the discussion in a naturalistic way, participants were asked to present their discussion using a power line – taking a step forward if their point was poignant and made an impact, and backwards if not – forcing the actors to actually think about the affect of what they were saying on their partner.

Finally, we worked on a whole group physical/rhythmic exercise called Transformations. Half the group represented a man / woman from the early 1900s and the other half from the present day. They then created 5 frozen images to represent a day in the life of their character – morning, mid-morning, lunch, afternoon and evening. They then transformed from image to image over 10 beats, 5 beats and then 1 beat.

All in all, it was a busy and productive day. Be sure to share your thoughts / opinions with each other on the BLOG…

LAB 1 - Kicking a Dead Horse

Sunday 21 September 2008

Today was the first LAB session and an opportunity for the creative team and participants to meet for the first time.

We began the day by doing some exercises on group dynamics - this was the first time that many of the participants had worked together, so it was important to encourage a sense of camaraderie and team work.

All participants also took part in a Celebrate the Name exercise. In pairs, participants told each other everything they knew about their own names. They then went away and wrote a poem to celebrate their partner’s name.

We then went on to focus on the idea of gathering yourself up. Participants were asked to invent a scenario where they were leaving something behind. Where were they going? What were they taking? What part of them were they leaving behind? And what part of them were they taking?

Participants were then introduced to the character of Hobart Struther – an American man in his mid-60s, described as an, “Urban Businessman,” who, “suddenly decided to rough it.” He is tired and frustrated. With every new characteristic, participants adapted their physicality accordingly. They were then each given one of his lines to perform.

After lunch, we read and discussed the play. Some of the ideas that interested the participants / questions that arose included:
-The significance of setting – do we change to fit our surroundings or do our surroundings change us?
-What was the significance of the woman? Was she real or part of his imagination? Was it his wife, cleaning up after him?
-The ideal verses reality
-The Quest – the notion that the grass is always greener on the other side
-The impression of time – the heightened, dream world that he inhabited
-The clichés – deader than dirt, sick puppy etc
-The language (this sparked a debate about the use of obscenities in writing)
-The cartoon feel of the piece
-The fact that it is as if Hobart knows he has been written
-Everything that meant anything went into the hole, so it was inevitable that he would end up in it too
-The significance of material objects – do they equal happiness?
-The pursuit of happiness
-Loneliness
-Finding peace in the end.

Next we revisited the earlier characters from the gathering yourself up exercise, and asked a series of questions, ranging from the physical to the emotional; the daily to the psychological, to help gain a deeper insight into the characters that the participants had invented. From this, participants went on to write their own internal duologues for their characters, written at the point at which they were about to leave their old life behind. What dilemmas or pull in opposing directions were you facing? We shared these with one another and spent the remainder of the session discussing the day, and Tanya gave the group a series of questions to consider. These include:

1. What does 'authenticity' mean to you?

2. Are you afraid of death?

3. When and where do you feel most lonely?

4. Who or what is the 'dead horse' in your life?

5. What's your version of 'Kicking a Dead Horse'?

6. Write your own versions of 'Not my cup of meat' - where a well-known phrase is slightly twisted in an unexpected way. It doesn't matter how contemporary the phrase is, and the more phrases the merrier.

7. Write a list of food you might take with you on your journey. This can be from the perspective of the character you were working with on Sunday. E.g. Hobart's beans, jerky, trail-mix, plenty of water, m& m's...

PLEASE, PLEASE SHARE YOUR RESPONSES ON THE BLOG. WE’D LOVE YOU TO POST YOUR NAME POEMS TOO, AS WELL AS MINI BIOGS OF YOUR CHARACTERS… OR ANY OTHER COMMENTS THAT YOU HAVE…