Character Dinner

So tonight we embarked on a bit of an experiment. We booked a room on campus, bought some cold pasta dishes, a quiche, some salad, bread and butter, and a trifle. And asked our actors to come along and have a dinner party in their characters. I wasn't quite sure what to expect, but I thought it'd be a good way for everyone to get their heads back into the game after a 4 week break. I was looking for character dynamics, improvised interaction, instinctive responses, and generally anything of interest that may benefit or enhance the play.

The dynamics that came out of just a 25 minute exercise (such a thing like this must go for as long as is natural, and cannot be forced) were more than I'd anticipated, and were both very entertaining and telling.

The tension that arose when Jimmy stepped into the room was tangible, and the light-hearted chatter between Helena and Alison took on a bit of an edge. Jimmy stated "didn't we have salad yesterday?", unexpectedly highlighting the theme of mundane repetition that Abi had decided was a key element to really enhance in the production. Throughout the entire meal, Jimmy was provoking, baiting Helena into argument, and doing his best to belittle Alison. Poor Cliff (who, as one would expect, had the most food on his plate) continually attempted to keep the peace with little comments on the meal, complimenting Alison and hoping Jimmy would calm down.

As an overall experience, it was very informative for me as a director to see how much the actors had picked up on the characters from the text, and how comfortable they were to respond when moved away from the set script. This confirmed their characterisation and the work they've done thus far, and has put us in good stead for the final few rehearsals. I'm really happy with the way they have developed and their interpretations of the characters matches what I'd wanted to get from them almost exactly, which is why they've required fairly little emotional directing up until this point. I look forward to the next fortnight with the rest of the play coming together, and I think tonight's exercise will have strengthened their onstage relationships.

The final leg - Preparation

So it's curtain up in 2 weeks' time. That is a terrifying thought - we've three scheduled rehearsals left, though I've no doubt we'll put in some more hours in between. I can't believe I'm here already, having stepped into this role with no idea of who I was or what I was doing as a director. Now, I've got 2/3 of a completed play, and a much greater understanding of how I work in these situations.

Tonight, we've got a bit of a challenge. We are hosting a character dinner party. The room has been hired, we're in discussion about the food, but ultimately it'll be 2 hours of improvisation for the actors, and observation for myself and Abi. It'll be a good way to not only shake away the cobwebs of the Easter break, but also solidify the character relationships and idiosyncrasies that I saw developing throughout the workshops Abi had been taking. It'll also be a chance for me to get my head back in and pick up on the little subtleties that will make this play more than just a show, but a performance and insight into the human psyche.

Doing improvised scenarios like this provides both a safe environment for actors to experiment and see what comes naturally, and an opportunity for the directors to take in the atmosphere of a play without being tied down to the text. I'm intrigued to see what happens and what I learn from it.

Myself and other Directors

From the start of this process, I was concerned with the way in which I would be as a director. I felt that I didn't have the same approach as Abi - I wasn't hands on, couldn't think up clever, engaging warm-up workshops, and preferred to sit back and let the play unfold instinctively before making adjustments according to my own vision. Anne Bogart said something similar in her book A Director Prepares, in which she stated "I listen until there is movement and then I begin to swim"1 (2004: 2), referencing the way in which sharks will sit quietly at the bottom of the seabed until they sense vibrations of their prey. Rather than frantically searching for actors' motivations or actions, I wait until they move of their own accord and then make alterations as I see fit. It encourages me that other directors have a similar way of working.

I'm continuing to learn now that it is important, particularly in a co-directorship, for these differences in the way we approach the rehearsal room. This means that Abi and I are seldom at odds with one another, but rather compliment each other's work and attitudes, presenting different opinions and producing different results that merge towards the common goal of the play. Whereas I find it hard to develop workshops that access a particular part or theme of the play, I find it far easier to envisage the piece as an entire text, a whole period in time that develops and moves naturally in a linear fashion. This is mentioned by Katie Mitchell, who suggests that "Learning to hold the whole picture of what the audience will see in your head as you read the text is critical."2 (2008: 4) - and this is, luckily, what I find easiest. Whilst reading the play felt difficult, I was able to generate a 'film-like' version of it that I can now relate to my actors on stage, knowing full well how they are going to move from one scene to the next, and how their emotions and attitudes build in the context of several months.

Throughout the decades, directors have had different ideas about the best way to present a text, and these differences have sparked numerous debates. Some of these debates have been discussed in the book Re:Direction: A Theoretical and Practical Guide, edited by Rebecca Schneider and Gabrielle H Cody; as Cody writes in her introduction to Part III, 'Theatres of community and transculturalism', "While realistic Directors like Lee Strasberg would still privilege an 'angle of viewing', directors such as Artaud would strive for a profoundly communal experience."3 (2002: 217). This indicates that even the best directors throughout history have expressed unique and individual styles of directing which is evident in their plays themselves. Therefore, my own style coupled with Abi's ability to workshop and stimulate the actors should, in theory, produce a play that is both heavily grounded in textual analysis and understanding, and born from actor experimentation and evolution. Whilst my style relates to "the processes of reading and interpretation which determine meaning"4 (Rabkin, G. 2002: 329) in the text, Abi works best through physicality and improvisation; this combination of attributes allows for a full and complex production that is intellectual and instinctive.

Whilst previously I'd been nervous in the rehearsal room, unsure of my role as director and whether or not I was doing the 'right' thing, I now am confident in my position as the observer-director. I am free to interject the actors whenever I feel necessary, whilst also taking notes throughout Abi's workshops which give insight into the characters' subconscious actions and influence my scene work. It is encouraging to read about directors in the past who have had alternate ways of working, and how not one can be considered better than another. By establishing myself and what I am comfortable doing in terms of direction, I can move into this final chapter of the rehearsal process knowing that the way we've been working this far has been successful.



(1) Bogart, A. (2004), A Director Prepares: Seven Essays on Art and Theatre, Routledge
(2) Mitchell, K. (2008), The Director's Craft: A Handbook for the Theatre, Routledge
(3) Cody, G. (2002), 'Introduction to Part III', in Cody, G. and Schneider, R. (eds) Re:Direction: A Theoretical and Practical Guide, Routledge
(4) Rabkin, G. (2002), 'Is there a text on this stage? Theatre, authorship, interpretation', in Cody, G. and Schneider, R. (eds) Re:Direction: A Theoretical and Practical Guide, Routledge

Rehearsal #4 - pages 50-77

Yesterday's rehearsal was another great success, covering a large chunk of the play so Acts one and two are now complete. This middle section of the text is incredibly emotionally intense, as it is the buildup to Alison leaving Jimmy - there's a lot involved including arguments, emotional breakdowns, and the increasing tension throughout the scenes. However, as always the actors handled the text remarkably well and required very little in the way of emotional directing - this meant that for the majority of the day I was merely directing their movement and blocking to fit in with our traverse staging.

The very end of Act Two sees the confrontation between Jimmy and Helena reach a head, climaxing in her slapping Jimmy, and the couple falling onto the bed in an embrace. Up until this point we've skipped over a lot of the kissing scenes just as we were first getting into it. However, both Abi and I felt it very important to get the ending of this scene right as it will be followed by a second interval. Needless to say, it was a rather giggly experience - from a professional level, the actors handled it all incredibly well and after a few attempts at the slap we were able to choreograph the movement to make it both believable and practical in terms of staging. It was, as could be expected, an awkward scene to direct as they are two of my friends and coursemates, and making them embrace on stage does feel rather unnatural and odd. But in the end it was a successful scene, and as it's been done properly once, it'll undoubtedly be easier each time we re-run the scene.

Overall, I was really happy with the rehearsal and felt we've managed to get through a large proportion of the text before we break for four weeks for Easter. Similarly, I'm learning that I am a different kind of director to Abi - she is very good at the physical workshops and getting everyone warmed up and into character. I find myself wholly drawn to the text and interested in directing the emotion of my actors once their onstage. This realisation has helped me relax more into the role and feel able to take charge of certain aspects whilst not feeling like I'm missing out on others. Therefore the method of co-directing is working incredibly well, each of us complimenting and working with each other.

This version of 'Girls Just Wanna Have Fun' by Greg Laswell will be played at the end of the play. During another music/character workshop, both Alison and Helena were greatly affected by the song.

Past productions

The premiere of Look Back in Anger was on the 8th May 1956 at the Royal Court Theatre in London by the English Stage Company.  Directed by Tony Richardson, there are infamous rumours of audiences gasping at the site of an ironing board on stage, yet it was still described as "the best young play of its decade"(1) by Kenneth Tyan in the Observer.
 The original cast was as follows:

Alan Bates	Cliff Lewis
Helena Hughes	Helena Charles
Kenneth Haigh	Jimmy Porter
John Welsh	Colonel Redfern
Mary Ure	Alison Porter

It then transferred to America on the 1st October, 1957, at the Lyceum Theatre in New York, and ran for 5 months. It moved to the John Golden Theatre in March 1958 where it played for a further 6 months. It racked up a total of 407 performances, and was nominated for three Tony Awards in 1958: Best Play, Best Actress (Mary Ure), and Best Costume (Motley).

Over the last 50 years, there have been many revivals of the play, being received by many audience demographics and ages, and producing different effects. 2005 saw a touring production based from the Royal Lyceum Theatre in Edinburgh, with David Tennant as Jimmy. Rather than finding it to be an 'old generation' play, Thelma Good saw that "Jimmy Porter's angst echoes uncomfortably in our modern souls"(2); this is something I hope to get across in the production too. The way in which something seemingly so long-past can reflect on our current lives is a powerful thing in the theatre.

The 2009 production at the Northern Stage theatre in Newcastle was seen by Alfred Hickling to be a difficult one to watch - LBiA relies fairly heavily on the context of the generation in which it was written. The angry youth, misogynistic Jimmy, and lost lives aren't quite translatable to a modern audience, Hickling decided(3). The reception of such a play is therefore difficult to gauge as some audience members will reflect upon their own lives in the mid-1950s, whilst others see it as a 'good story' of the lost generations.

In their 2011/2012 season, the Roundabout Theatre Company in New York put on LBiA directed by Sam Gold. It received mixed reviews, a New York audience struggling with the "ultra-British"(4) nature of the play, however people were still encouraged to go and see if for themselves, experiencing the ever-present anger still rife on stage.

I want to stay true to Osbourne's text in reflecting the desperation and depression of his characters, whilst not tying it to the 1950s. Therefore, the play will be in an almost 'timeless' setting, influenced slightly by the 1980s and the form of social anxiety during the miner's strikes, but remaining ambiguous enough for any and all spectators to be able to relate to it.




(1) Tyan, K. (1956) on Royal Court Theatre archive, available at: http://www.royalcourttheatre.com/whats-on/look-back-in-anger/?tab=4
(2) Good, T. (2005) 'Look Back in Anger', Edinburgh Guide, 15 January, Theatre: Reviews, [online] Available at: http://www.edinburghguide.com/aande/theatre/reviews_05/l/look_back_in_anger_rtl.shtml, [accessed: 19 March 2013]
(3) Hickling, A. (2009) 'Look Back in Anger', The Guardian, 12 March, Stage: John Osbourne, [online] Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2009/mar/12/look-back-in-anger-review, [accessed: 19 March 2013]
(4) Teachout, T. (2012) 'Still Angry After All These Years', The Wall Street Journal, 3 February, Theater, [online] Available at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204652904577191591501380790.html, [accessed: 19 March 2013]

Rehearsal #3 - Pages 33-50

Yet another very good rehearsal - having willing and talented actors does definitely help the process. I am however once again feeling rather overwhelmed. Coming into the hall I felt terribly inadequate, and though the run went perfectly, the blocking looked great, and the emotions were strong, I still couldn't shake a feeling of doubt. This is an aspect of directing I had not expected to come across.
Following the rehearsal, Abi led a character workshop. Getting the actors to lie on the floor, close their eyes, and imagine the characters taking over, whilst summoning various emotions and memories is a classic technique for characterisation. After this, Abi played various pieces of music and asked the actors to respond physically in character - this was a very insightful exercise for me to watch as it started to uncover layers of emotion that really help to build the play. But I wasn't sure I'd be able to run such a workshop - the ideas appeared so obvious once they had been said, but I had little creativity to make them up myself. This is something I am definitely going to work on.
It's no use if the director feels uncertain or self-conscious - they must lead the actors and help draw the play. So next week, I'm going to go into the rehearsal room with confidence that it is developing as I had hoped (which it is), and shake off this feeling of doubt.

Music character work

I am considering extending the project to include a dramaturgical study of Look Back in Anger, exploring past productions of the text and the reception they received. This will be confirmed following a meeting with my supervisor, but I will start looking into past shows over the Easter break.

Rehearsal #2 - Act One

I was very nervous for this rehearsal - it was my first experience of being a director. Me, in charge of actors, telling them what to do in order to get across a playwrights' words and intentions. Intimidating to say the least - my major obstacle I'm facing throughout this process is self-doubt. I don't see myself as authoratitive, have never thought myself as a theatrical creative, so suddenly wondered why on earth I'd decided to take control of an entire play.

The start of the rehearsal was rather shakey - one actor was half an hour late, and I wasn't sure how to begin the session. With only three characters involved in Act One, I couldn't think of a suitable workshop or warmup to do, nor did I have the confidence to take charge straight away. We spent the first half hour (whilst waiting for the other actor) looking through Abi's set designs and getting a bit of a feel for how the stage will be laid out. This did help me ease into the session, and I know that next week I'll be able to walk in with more confidence and awareness of what I'm doing. This is something I definitely need to work on - the reassurance of myself in the role of director, and an awareness of my ability.

The rehearsal went as well as I could have hoped. I'd planned to cover the first 33 pages - quite an ambitious feat, ending just a few pages shy of curtain down. Yet as soon as the actors stepped onto our minimally laid out space, I knew exactly where I wanted them and what I wanted them to do. Once they were in front of me, the script came alive and I could see it as the final production already. Straight away, I felt more able to direct them - I had no hesitations about stopping them mid-sentence and rearranging them, moving their heads, altering the emotions. And, what impressed me most, was that they responded and dutifully continued according to my direction. I know that is what an actor is supposed to do, but when presented with coursemates I'd had some reservations again about my authority. I needn't have worried as they're all working as professionals, and were able to take on board my directions without question.

We got through all 33 pages, and were even able to do a dry-run at the end of the session. Seeing my ideas combined with the beginnings of Abi's set was very encouraging; it worked, it flowed, and it had the emotional intensity that the script requires. The speedbump of my own doubt is almost cleared, and next week is set to be promising too.