FAS110 All Modules Discussions (January 2018)

FAS 110 Living the Theatre

Module 1 Discussion

The Power of Theatre and Ritual in Society

The power of theater, storytelling and ritual has been a part of the human condition and experience since the beginning of recorded civilization and history. Even prior to recorded history, the human person must have utilized elements of emotional expression and personal experience (as both prey and predator) as a way to navigate the unknown to assure his or her survival.

Whether religious, cultural, spiritual or mythological, components of ritual and ceremony have permeated the human condition, thought and society. Theater was used to teach religion (The Mystery Plays/England) was a way to discuss the construct of Gods and the human condition (Greek Theatre) and has been a vehicle for cultural, political, religious and societal moral questions. Contemporary theater can simply be utilized as sheer entertainment, without any cultural, political, religious or moral motivation. Its objective is for an audience to simply and unabashedly have fun.

Having read Chapter I, and the other readings within this module, is theater still a necessary construct today? Within this technological age, where entertainment can be derived and obtained instantaneously from cellular devices, iPhones and iPads, etc., is theater still relevant and a necessary construct of the human experience and condition today? Why and/or why not? You can use any of the readings to assist you in the discussion or simply communicate your opinion from your own personal experience

FAS 110 Living the Theatre

Module 2 Discussion

William Shakespeare’s Hamlet:

Hamlet: Speak the speech I pray you as I pronounced it to you,trippingly on the tongue; but if you mouth it as many of your players do, I had as lief the town-crier spoke my lines. Nor do not saw the air too much with your hand thus, but use all gently; for in the very torrent, tempest, and, as I may say, whirlwind of your passion, you must acquire and beget a temperance that may give it smoothness. Oh, it offends me to the soul to hear a robustious periwig-pated fellow tear a passion to tatters, to very rags, to split the ears of the groundlings, who for the most part are capable of nothing but inexplicable dumb-shows and noise. I would have such a fellow whipped for o’erdoing Termagant — it out-Herods Herod. Pray you avoid it.

In Hamlet’s speech to the players (traveling actors) he urges them to present a performance that is truthful, that has substance. He advises the actors not to over exaggerate, but to give the performance a smoothness (through acquired temperance).

Constantin Stanislavski introduced Method Acting that encouraged truthful acting through self reflection, discipline, rigorous training and analysis. The objective for Stanislavski and William Shakespeare’s Hamlet was to construct truthful, three dimensional characters that an audience would believe. Even more importantly that the actor could convey (naturally and truthfully).

DISCUSSION TOPIC/QUESTION:

Why is this method of acting still so important today? Why can’t I just memorize the lines and be done with it? If I (as an actor) can conjure up emotions at will and give a good speech, shouldn’t that be enough?! Why do I need to study, research and learn about the characters that I am portraying?

Can you think of any actor today (who you admire) who discussed what they went through in order to become a character they were hired to portray? If so, provide an example in your discussion. If not, perhaps you can research this topic (select an actor in a famous role), and/or discuss what you think it would take for an actor to make a character believable to an audience.

You did so well in the last discussion, I’m looking forward to reading your opinions and ideas.

FAS 110 Living the Theatre

Module 3 Discussion

The Director

Directors are responsible for every aspect of the performance, from the theme to the conceptual design, to the pacing and rhythm of dialogue, language and music, to the costumes, set designs, blocking, acting, etc. They are responsible for interpreting what the playwright is trying to convey through the actor(s) and ultimately to the audience.

The director is an architect, because he creates a blue print, a foundation from which all other aspects of the theatrical performance is built upon.

Can you think of a production, (whether on stage and/or on screen) where the vision and concept of the director challenges us to think about story, theater and/or performance in a new and different way? For example, in Schindler’s List, the entire movie is presented using Eastman’s Black and White film. The only splash of color is the red coat worn by a young Jewish girl (no more than 4 or 5 years old) who walks abandoned and seemingly alone (though surrounded by hundreds) during the liquidation of the ghetto in Krakow, Poland during WWII.

Here is an image from that scene:Image result for Schindler’s List color of film black and white

Here is the clip from the movie. I believe this is the inciting incident, the moment of transformation/awareness for the movie’s hero Oskar Schindler, a member of the Nazi Party, who at the end of this journey saved thousands of Jews, (ultimately millions) with the preceding generations, from concentration camps, particularly the death camp at Auschwitz.

Later in the movie, Oskar Schindler sees the red coat being discarded along with other personal items of the deceased. It is then that he comes to the realization the little girl he saw walking alone in the ghetto is dead.

The Black and White film set a tone and created a feeling. The red coat that the little girl wore, also could be perceived as the inciting incident in the screenplay, where at that particular critical moment, the hero (Oskar Schindler) began to have a true conscious awareness about what was going on and began to have a change of heart and transformation (the hero’s journey).

Steven Spielberg won an Oscar (his first) for Best Director that year.

Select a director that has done something entirely unique and groundbreaking in the theater and or film industry and convey why you have selected him or her for your discussion. Use examples from a production he or she has directed and elaborate upon their body of work. Expound upon how their vision and artistic direction has changed, challenged and or has elevated the world of art.

I selected Steven Spielberg because of his extraordinary talent, particularly in Schindler’s List, which in my opinion, is one of the greatest historical dramas about the Holocaust and WWII ever made. I discovered this interview with Steven Spielberg, where he discusses the historical reality and truth behind Oskar Schindler and the Holocaust. During the interview, a substantial amount of information is provided about the making of the film. For example, how he was able to maintain a sense of composure, and stability, despite the graphic images and horrific atrocities that he had to capture and record on film. Also, during the interview, he discusses the Little Girl in the Red Coat, whom Oskar Schindler actually witnessed during the liquidation of the Jewish ghetto in Krakow, Poland. A truth and sad reality that Steven Spielberg captured so brilliantly in this extraordinary film.

The entire interview is approximately nine minutes, and twenty four seconds in length, but in my opinion, well worth the time, if you respect this director and his work. During the interview he states that in his opinion, Schindler’s List is his greatest work of all, not only because of the film, but even more so for the educational foundation and survivor project that he created after the movie was completed.

Steven Spielberg winning the Oscar, Clint Eastwood is the presenter!

FAS 110 Living the Theatre

Module 4 Discussion

The Playwright

Playwrights create an imaginary world for an audience to explore, enter into and engage in. Oftentimes there are cathartic moments during the course of the theatrical experience. Sometimes not, as is the case with Epic plays such as The Three Penny Opera, written by German playwright Bertolt Brecht.

Playwrights portray a theatrical body of work through a realistic and/or non realistic lens, (realism/non realism). That decision occurs during the unfolding of the plot, language, characters and spectacle within the dramatic structure. The theatrical conventions and structure are entirely up to the playwright’s vision and concept.

In the assigned readings for this Module (chapters 9 and 12) several playwrights, set designers, directors, artists and choreographers were introduced. Whether it was Bertolt Brecht’s Verfremdungseffekt or Epic Theatre, German Expressionism, European Realism and/or Non Realism, playwright’s created a theatrical landscape that employed various styles, methods, movements and artistic influences.

From this context, select a playwright (you can choose one of the playwright’s discussed in the assigned readings) and discuss why their body of work has changed, challenged and/or influenced the theater and an audience’s theatrical experience.

Playwrights such as Bertolt Brecht and Samuel Beckett (for example) would be good selections because of their extensive body of work and their influence on contemporary theater even today. However, you can select any playwright that you admire, although you must provide an example as to why their work has challenged, inspired and impacted the theatrical world and experience.

Mother Courage is a play written by Bertolt Brecht about war and its victims. This video clip highlights scenes from the play that was adapted by Tony Kushner and performed at the Delcourte Theater in New York City in 2006. Actress Meryl Streep played the role of Mother Courage. This interview offers her unique perspective as an actress as to why the playwright’s words and theater is still relevant even today. A playwright such as Bertolt Brecht, and/or William Shakespeare has that ability. Their words and influence are not bound by time and/or place, in fact, their ideas are universal, striking a cord with the masses. Their canon of dramatic literature is timeless, infiltrating borders, and can be adapted and presented in different languages, in varying countries, for many generations to come.

FAS 110 Living the Theatre

Module 5 Discussion

The Designer

The designer (whether lighting, costume or sound) creates an environment for the stage and an experience for the audience. Whether the concept be representational (true to real life) or presentational (an abstract, distorted reality) the design has to be functional and accessible not only for the actors, but also for the stage crew and audience.

When I think of extravagant stage designs, I immediately think of Carl Fillion’s multi-million dollar machine used in the staging of Richard Wagner’s Das Rheingold at the Metropolitan Opera in New York City.

Please watch the trailer on Youtube: Das Rheingold Trailer from Cineworld Cinemas. It is 2 minutes and 25 seconds in length and then respond to the following:

Director Robert Lepage and Set designer Carl Fillion utilized a 45 ton machine that included vertical platforms, (a palisade of two dozen fiberglass covered aluminum planes) that tilted vertically and horizontally to create and form various stage configurations.

This huge structure of large moving planks moved back and forth creating the surface of the Rhine River in Germany. it also was used as a screen for video projections, it had motifs and was interactive, triggered by the movements of the performers. The performers were catapulted above it, they climbed on top of it, slid down it. Sometimes the platforms became horizontal, other times vertical depending upon the action on stage. At the opening of the opera, The Rhine Maidens (three mermaids) dangled from cables and sung full operatic scores while maneuvering and balancing themselves above and onto the moving planks of the Valhalla Machine as it was ultimately dubbed. The Rhine waters (large planks) swayed to and fro creating the movement of water, turned to gold coins, produced bubbles as the mermaids swam beneath the surface, and became a platform where the Rhine Maidens could perch themselves on and slide down from. This all occurs just in the opening scene! Later during the opera, the Machine turns into a staircase to get the actors from one location to another. It also turns into a rainbow bridge, an entry way into Valhalla (Heaven), that the performers are able to walk upon and enter into (at the close of the opera). You will see this scene at the end of the trailer. The Machine was malleable and versatile and did many more configurations during the course of the opera (too many too list).

There was a problem however, the production was delayed because of technical difficulties with the machine. Also, several productions received mixed reviews because the machine broke down in the middle of the performance, yet the opera singers had to maintain their composure and the highest level of artistry despite the lifeless (yet integral machine). Which apparently they would manage to do DESPITE the problems with the machine (as noted by numerous critiques).

I saw the production and personally appreciated the complexity and beauty of this elaborate machine. I personally felt it added to the overall experience of the production. For me, it was a tremendous artistic endeavor and achievement. During the night I saw it, the machine behaved and did not break down. The Valhalla Machine (also dubbed the difficult diva) was given this title because it would perform and/or not perform at any given whim and/or time within and during a performance.

After you have viewed the trailer of Das Rheingold, featuring what is considered to be the MOST expensive and extravagant set design ever constructed for a contemporary stage, discuss whether you think this type of set design for entertainment, (theater, the opera, musicals, etc.) is worth it. Should a set design, (no matter how extravagant) be created at any cost, to fulfill the vision and concept of the director and/or designer?

I personally wish you could see the full production of Das Rheingold (the Metropolitan Opera’s version/with the Machine) but being that this is only an 8 week class, time is precious and limited. For now, please see the trailer and let me know what you think. However, if you enjoy the Das Rheingold trailer, I have included an additional trailer: The Wagner Ring Cycle, that shows highlights/footage from the entire operatic production that was shown at the Metropolitan Opera in New York City. The multi-million dollar stage was utilized during the course of the entire Wagner Cycle.

I have also included an interview with Robert Lapage, the director of Wagner’s Ring Cycle at the Met. The trailer is called: Wagner’s Dream the opening bars…In this video, you will see the orchestra, stage crew working backstage (actually beneath the stage) manipulating the large planks of the Machine.

For those interested in what happens backstage (behind the scene) with the set crew, I have included another video called: Wagner’s Dream Rolling Out the Machine. It gives you an idea about how large the Machine was and how difficult it was to install it within the actual theater/opera house.

The Machine was developed, designed and tested in Canada by set designer Carl Fillion and Robert Lapage (who was the director of Cirque du Soleil before coming to the Met) and transferred by several moving trucks into New York City where it was assembled by the Met’s stage crew.

The video: 2010 New Met Production of the Ring Cycle shows a condensed version of everything that went into designing this elaborate production from set to costumes, from drawings to actual creation.

I hope you enjoy all the videos of this production as much as I do! However, if you enjoy or want to learn more about the making of Wagner’s Ring Cycle, I recommend the documentary film: Wagner’s Dream; The Making of Der Ring Des Nibelungen, a must see for those who want to learn more about what goes on in the theater before a production even gets started.

FAS 110 Living the Theatre

Module 6 Discussion

Decisions

From the readings assigned for this Module, you can see how much thought and consideration goes into the production of a play, especially in the commercial theater industry. Referencing the two different productions of the play: “And the Soul Shall Sing,” you can see the varying degrees and elements that differ in set design, style, language and interpretation. All of these elements create an aesthetic to attract a wider and broader audience.

As an artist, one always hopes that the art form will be served and given complete attention and priority. But in the case of several examples posed in the readings, such as The New Birmingham Repertory Theater, a changing of the guards (artistic directors) of the theater, often means a change in policy and program. This change oftentimes leaves former members discouraged and dissatisfied, while attempting to net a wider audience. As in the production of Der Ring de Nibelungen, at the Metropolitan Opera in New York City, traditional opera fans, (most notably Wagner fans) were very displeased with the concept and implementation of a new creation. They wanted and expected traditions to continue and remain as they were. They didn’t feel Wagner’s Opera needed any new theatrical experiments or trends. However, hiring a director such as Robert Lapage meant there would be change, especially considering his recent directing debut at the Met and his directing experience with Cirque De Soleil. Consequently, arguments were forged, hurled and presented in numerous reviews critiquing the new opera. This criticism wasn’t the sole domain of theater critiques, since similar reactions were swirling and transpiring among opera fans who were waiting on ticket lines hours before tickets were released to the public! This kind of controversy often draws a wider audience, but sometimes, it can backfire, as it often does in many commercial venues such as with the New Birmingham Repertory Theater in London.

On March 23, 2015, an article titled: A Fight at the Opera, was published by the New Yorker Magazine. The author, James Stewart vehemently criticizes and blames Peter Gelb (General Manager and Director of the Metropolitan Opera) for the mismanagement of funds and the fiscal crisis that the opera allegedly faces.

Here is the link to the article: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/03/23/a-fight-at-the-opera.

You may have to enter the link into your browser, but the entire article will come up when you do a search.

I highly encourage you to read the article, since it provides an excellent example of what the text and readings for this week in Module 6 is trying to convey about the risks involved when introducing new ideas and trends in contemporary, yet conservative theaters. Questions such as: Who should take the fall, when those “new ideas,” don’t pan out as well as expected? Also, what happens to the theater and their employees, when wealthy donors (who aren’t pleased with the contemporary trends) decide to take their endowments and donations elsewhere?

According to this article, an investor donated $20 million dollars so that Wagner’s Ring Cycle could be produced at the Metropolitan Opera House. Unfortunately, the cost was much higher than expected. According to this article, it cost the Metropolitan Opera $40 million dollars to produce the entire Ring Cycle, which was apparently raised by other undisclosed sources.

Subsequently, after this article was published, the New Yorker Magazine received numerous letters in support and also, negating James Stewart’s position and criticisms in A Fight at the Opera. On April 6, 2015, three letters were published and posted by the Editor in The Mail. I am pasting those letters for your perusal:

DRAMA AT THE MET

We were disheartened to read James Stewart’s piece about the Metropolitan Opera, which presents a one-sided, negative view of what is, in fact, a thriving, vital organization that is essential to the cultural life of New York, and of the world (“A Fight at the Opera,” March 23rd). The article emphasizes the challenging economics of grand opera and the difficulties of the Met’s recent union negotiations without providing a balanced perspective on a company that is at the height of its artistic powers. Today, the Met is at the fore, making opera globally accessible through our game-changing, live, high-definition transmissions, which have been seen by millions of people, in seventy countries. We’re certainly not suggesting that sustaining the Met is an easy task, but, under the watchful eye of the energetic Peter Gelb, his management team, and our dedicated board, it is a mission that is being accomplished. There is plenty of drama at the Met, both onstage and off, but not as Stewart told it.

Kevin Kennedy, President

Ann Ziff, Chairman

William C. Morris, Executive Committee Chairman

Judith-Ann Corrente, Secretary

Metropolitan Opera

New York City

As the principal union representative of solo singers and choristers at the Met, I was disappointed by Stewart’s story about Gelb’s leadership and the battle over contracts. A chorister’s day might start at 10 A.M. and end around midnight. During this summer’s contract negotiations, much attention was focused on principal artists, and in particular on the plight of the mezzo-soprano Wendy White, who experienced a career-ending injury after falling from a platform. Eugene Keilin, an independent financial expert, advised us on what we had to do to “save the Met,” and he recommended that the Met management save a dollar amount equal to the concessions offered by unions. The unions made concessions by taking pay cuts. The Met saved money not by limiting the number of expensive new productions but by firing and laying off twenty-two employees. The board has failed to rein in Gelb’s out-of-control spending, and the relationship between Gelb and Met employees continues to be antagonistic. A union-driven efficiency committee, a partnership between the singers and the orchestra, keeps track of—and protests—the waste and extravagance that are still the order of the day at the Met.

Alan Gordon

Executive Director, American Guild of Musical Artists, A.F.L.-C.I.O.

New York City

As a longtime opera buff and a subscriber to the Met, I was stunned to learn the extent of the institution’s financial problems. The Met’s operating deficits are so immense that its assets must be pledged to fund them. Gelb’s new “brilliant directors,” as he has called them, have resulted in controversial productions, unhappy opera goers, and a decline in attendance. Opera is primarily a musical genre, and the art form as we know it today is the product of composers like Mozart, Verdi, and Wagner, who had keen theatrical sensibilities. Productions by directors who do not understand the scores, and who seek to reinterpret the story lines, may get good press coverage but do not age well. For a repertory company like the Met, the goal should be to put on productions that enhance the musical experience rather than detract from it. I hope that Gelb goes before the Chagall murals do.

Franklin Bloomer

Riverside, Conn.

I thought these letters were excellent examples as to the variety of ideas, thoughts and opinions out there regarding the very challenges art directors, managers and theaters often have to face, when introducing new trends and ideas into a theatrical landscape that doesn’t always appreciate change. Particularly change that costs a substantial amount of money to produce.

As an artist, I feel art (particularly evocative, aesthetically thought provoking art) should take precedence above the cost and above the masses ideas of what is commercially relevant and/or desirable. Probably why I am not the artistic director of a commercial theater (nor would I desire that role)! That being said, what is your opinion? Should art directors/ theater(s) take the risk, presenting new art forms, theatrical conventions and plays if that means losing a majority of your mainstream traditional audience?

The question: “To be or not to be?” That is, should art directors be true (to the aesthetic) to the quality of art being presented, rather than simply serving commercial trends and financial dividends?

Should the art director risk (at all costs) in order to bring to the theater (the stage) and a wider audience something thought provoking, vibrant and new? Keep in mind, by doing so, and by being true and serving the new aesthetic, some theaters would be at risk of losing traditionalists, the audience members who have been consistently supportive both literally and financially (they purchase season tickets and/or are the patrons/donors) of the theater.

Perhaps you are very conservative in your opinion, and believe art directors (theaters) should play it safe, (especially in difficult economic times). Then the new trends, exploratory theater, plays and conventions (though an interesting idea and concept) in the reality of fiscal costs and possible risk is best curtailed and not to be. Although this opinion may not be very appealing to the artist or the new and burgeoning director and playwright, it is the decision that Art Directors of Commercial Theaters often have to make today. They forego new ideas, conventions and trends, in order to serve the mainstream audience and reliable customer (consumer and donor) who for the most part, will continue to purchase tickets and donate money, as long as the productions are traditional, conservative and conventional. Basically what they are familiar with and accustomed to.

Then there is always the middle ground, as was attempted by the New Birmingham Repertory Theater in London. The newly hired art director (to appease the traditionalists and attract a new audience) split the seasons in half. This could be and is an applicable resolution to a much broader dilemma and question that many theaters face today. The question being: How does a theater keep the traditional (reliable) members that you have, while expanding and experimenting to attract a new audience, thus widening the net to bring in much needed revenue?

If you were hired as the artistic director of a commercial theater, you could use this method as a template for your theater’s repertoire. For example, during one season, you could produce shows that appeal to the traditional palate (tastes) and conservative audience, while during the next season you can expand and explore by promoting more diverse and exploratory theatrical conventions.

You choose and respond to the following question during the Discussion:

If you were the artistic director of a commercial theater what would you do? Serve the traditionalists, who have buttered your bread (so to speak) purchased seasonal theater tickets, (though you have not drawn in a more versatile and contemporary audience) or would you serve art, for art’s sake, forget about conservative tradition, your theater is changing with technology (and with the times) and will serve a new, exploratory theater?

Perhaps you would like to play it safe, yet also explore. As art director, you can implement two diverse seasons; one to fulfill the traditional, conservative trend, while during the following season cast a wider net, breaking traditional rules. Keep in mind, while doing so, that exploratory season can also turn off the traditionalist audience in the process. By gaining a wider audience, you may also lose the traditional conservative members who consistently show up and support your theater. Either way, it’s a gamble, you may win? But you also could lose! Make a decision (as art director) and discuss why you think that is the best way to move your theater forward.

I look forward to reading your ideas and discussion.

FAS 110 Living the Theatre

Module 7 Discussion

Exploring New Horizons

I want to place you in the director’s seat! Rather than give a prediction about where theater is headed in the future, I want you to tell me where (in your opinion) should theater be headed?!

Knowing everything you know about past and contemporary theater styles and trends, where (if you were director) would your theater be headed? I want you to delve into the future, while considering current trends and outcomes from the past (successful and/or unsuccessful). Use the past to guide your direction, but don’t get stuck there! Have an objective, create a landscape/blueprint of a theater that you would like to merge beyond the past and present into the future. What would your theater look like? What would you incorporate from the past, what would you maintain from the contemporary and how would you change to meet the demands of the future? Would you incorporate the newest technology, music, social justice issues, trends? Consider musicals like Hamilton, conceived and composed by Lin-Manuel Miranda who incorporates Rap and/or Hip Hop music to move the narrative along. This is a play based on American history and the life of Alexander Hamilton. In the past, this would have been considered unheard of. Look at set designs from Frankenstein, that premiered in London, and/or Richard Wagner’s Ring Cycle directed by Cirque Dul Soleil’s Robert Lapage at the Met. In recent news, two Pulitzer Prize winners are finally making their debut on Broadway this season. What makes this out of the ordinary? Lynn Nottage and Paula Vogel are both women. Within this post, I have included an article about the plight of women writing for the stage. I recommend you peruse the article and see how you might address this plight in your theater.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/22/theater/lynn-nottage-paula-vogel-broadway.htm

Perhaps, in your opinion, this isn’t terribly important. That is, diversity of voices and/or complex subject matters being explored on stage. However, perhaps, in your opinion, a variety of voices on stage does matter. Should only one perspective and paradigm be considered when developing and/or exploring plays for the theater or should a variety of diverse voices be included? Is theater a place for social justice issues to be examined and explored?, Should Eco-Drama plays about the environment, such as Sila by Canadian playwright Chantal Bilodeau be given a platform? Make a decision, where do you stand? Don’t be sedentary; be active. At least that is what I am asking you to do in this week’s discussion.

For those of you who want to remain neutral, and don’t feel too strongly and/or passionately about incorporating social justice issues, environment and/or diverse voices onto the stage, I am going to provide you with another option. Not that you don’t care, but entertainment, for the sheer pleasure and enjoyment of it, is where you want your theater to go. I would like you to explore the following objectives for your initial post:

If I walked into your theater company 10 -20 years from now, what would I see? Describe it, paint it, give me a landscape a vision (your vision). Don’t just tell me where you think theater is headed, I want to know (as director) what is your conceptual design for the future (the marriage and/or merge of art and technology) basically, what will your theater look like architecturally inside and out?! Be creative, be in charge!

For this Discussion, you be the trendsetters, discuss your vision, set a goal and paint a landscape; a blueprint of your conceptual theater design! Will it be sensory, can I feel the seats and earth move beneath my feet? Will water not only immerse the actors, but the audience as well? You decide! As artistic director where do you want your theater to go? Describe what that might look like, feel like, smell like, sound like? If you want to stay traditional and you detest high technology and futuristic trends, then by all means say so. What will your theater look like in the future? Then tell me why? Why would you move your theater (as artistic director) in that direction.

Finally, if you want to incorporate both objectives within your theater design (architectural and social justice issues) by all means do so! In fact, in my opinion, a theater should encompass both, that is the visual and sensory experience and the message and issue the playwright is trying to address and convey. Both matters to me, however, I realize we are all different in our opinions, so you be the director. Tell us, what is your vision; what is your paradigm and perspective?

FAS 110 Living the Theatre

Module 8 Discussion

If All The World’s A Stage, Then Which Role Will You Play?

For the Final Project, you have to select a role to play in the production of Water by the Spoonful. Whether that is the role of an actor, set and/or costume designer, director and/or administrator, you have to decide what role best matches your skill set and/or interest. That being said, I would like for you to share with the class which role you selected and why? What about that specific role captivated your interest and drew your attention?

Then I would like you to discuss why you feel that specific role you selected is important and/or indispensable to the the production of Water by the Spoonful, but more importantly why it is integral to the multi-dimensional and ever evolving world of theater and the trans-formative theatrical stage?