All in all, there are many works of arts. There are many artists worldwide. Some are successful with their endeavor and some were a complete failure. Some were popular and known while others were not. Some were professionals while others amateur. It takes complete effort to become an artist and it takes art appreciation and talent to become one.
Theatre has had a more or less interesting history considering that it has continuously understood to be a mysterious art form which can entertain and teach. Even those who believed that they are of the lowliest in the status quo will be able to comprehend and enjoy the presentations that are offered to them. Its evolution is likened to peeling of an onion’s layers which, in order to rightfully understand the importance of each part, must be taken away. Thus comes the analogy wherein each part of the layers, including the scenery, the background, the stage, the music, the costumes, the actors, the audience, and even the direction are stripped individually just to take into the significance of all these elements.
This paper aims to provide a discussion of a theatre director’s methodologies and the concept of a director’s signature. It delves into the approaches and methods utilized by two chosen directors – Lloyd Newson and Mike Leigh. Basing information from an assortment of literatures collected and collated from written and electronic sources, the author will try to analyse the approaches, styles, and skills of the aforementioned dignitaries of arts.
Theatre as an Art Form
To draw the theatre as an art form, people must be able to act in this empathetic spirit (Bogart 2001). The fact that it is a one-of-a-kind type of performing arts makes it obvious to be in such characterization. But in new-fangled inclusive environment where people get their selves engrossed in commerce, in the marketplace, and in a world of competitive and diversified commodities, art is contemporary and multifaceted (Wilson & Goldfarb 2001). In support to the modern theatres worldwide, theatre is not just there for ‘art sake’ but is now greatly used as an epitome of life’s reality and an agent for social change. To recognize the distinct relationship between art and the way societies are structured, it is the artists who articulate the necessary myths that embody our experience of life and provide parameters for ethics and values (Bogart 2001). Now, we are not solely artists, but producers as well. Each of us is an artist as well as producer in one and we must took concern to the one that does not overwhelm the other. Artists are individuals who are willing to articulate in the face of instability and transformation (Bogart 2001). Basically, the successful artist finds new shapes for our present ambiguities and uncertainties.
In these contemporary times, the new mythologies of arts always include ideas, cultures and people who are formerly excluded from the previous mythologies. National and international cultures as well as artistic communities are currently undergoing gigantic shifts in traditions of arts (Bogart 2001). In line, technological and corporate revolutions have already changed the way people communicate, interact, live; make art; and articulate values and ethics (Wilson & Goldfarb 2001). The myths of the last century are now insufficient to encompass these new experiences. People are living in the space between mythologies. It is a very creative moment, brimming with possibilities of new social structures, alternate paradigms and for the inclusion of disparate cultural influences. And so to succeed in this fast-changing world, it requires action, speed, decisiveness and hard work. So, the history of art in connection to theatre is the history of inclusion (Bogart 2001).
Theatre Direction and the Director’s Role
Directing is a form of art that has dramatically evolved with the development of theatre theory and theatre practice. In 1905, Gordon Craig, a theorist-essayist-designer specified in his work On the Art of the Theatre that the function of the director is to create an exceptional and splendid theatrical experience starting up from an effective synthesis of script, design, and performance (Cohen 1983). The director must work hard to achieve coordination of all the elements involved in pre-production up to the end of the theatrical endeavor. Additionally, Jacques Copeau deemed that a director must accurately interpret the script into the most dramatic theatrical convention possible with respect to the playwright (Brockett 1982). The factual interpretation of the script is a good source of evaluation on the director’s intellectual and creative capabilities. From a collection of theatre printed records, authors concluded that the director is the last say in all matters pertaining to production, the performance in the stage, rehearsals, and the unity of the whole endeavor (Sievers, Stiver, & Kahan 1974). All needs ranging from the casts up to the creative workforce are main concerns of the director. He/she sees to it that every given situation especially during the production period is under control. Further, it is indicated in a popular theatre survey that the director must be equipped with the proper skills and talents in the process of conceiving, fore sighting, planning, and materializing the production. He/she must be able to inspire and unify the artists’ company (Cohen 1983). Thus, a director’s responsibility is multifaceted and requires sacrificial circumstances.
According to Berger and Luere (1998), directors play many parts in production, depending upon the type of theatre group in which they affiliate their selves – may it be a commercial theatre, a repertory group, an educational theatre facility. The responsibilities that they play at hand in such diverse venues will show distinct modes of interaction, authority, and responsibility. Further, the defined array and depth of their involvement at a venue can center upon the philosophy of the setting and its standpoint on the relevance of drama to society.
The director’s job, according to Director Sidney Berger (1994), is the “realization through you and the actors of the material of the play” must bring out for the creation and living solution onto the stage. He added, “A director to my mind is not a "stager" not someone who makes pictures; a director is someone who takes the print off the page and helps translate it into living terms.” During production, the director is the controlling component in guiding the courses of event. He/she is the one governing eye. When a director sets to action, he/she has a very specific set of circumstances (Berger 1994).
Aside from staging the play, coaching the actors and integrating the entire production, the director must achieve a unified impression upon the audience. Hence, the director must be and will always be the sole and final authority in tackling all matters related to the production. The bottom line of the entire director’s works is to make sure that he/she gave justice to the playwright’s work, meet all goals set, established effective theatre and organizational management, and eventual satisfaction of the audience and most importantly, his or her self.
Styles of Directing
Current theatrical conventions emerge together with new methodologies in which directors can put into practice (Wikipedia 2006). Generally speaking, most directors take on a style of directing that could be accounted into one or more of the following categories presented below. These styles are directly taken and quoted from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia (2006).
The dictator has a strongly assertive role and is very dominant in the process of creating a theatrical work. Rehearsals are more or less fully controlled and predictable, with the actors having little or no say.
The negotiator is a style of direction in which the director focuses on a more improvised and mediated form of rehearsal and creation, using the ideas of the production team and actors to shape a theatrical work in quite a democratic style.
The creative artist style of directing is where the director sees himself or herself as a creative artist working with the 'materials' of dramatic creativity, may it be the actors, designers and production team. The "creative artist" wants input from the actors but, as artist, has final say over what is included and how ideas are incorporated.
The confrontationalist style is where the director is in constant dialogue and debate with the cast and the production team about creative decisions and interpretations. He or she seeks out and actively engages in such exchanges. Out of these exchanges, which can sometimes be heated or risky, comes a final contested product. (Wikipedia 2006)
Meanwhile, a significant number of modern-day directors draw on an experimental, unconventional and creative combination of styles, depending on the genre and subject of the theatrical work as well as the characteristic of the venture and the type of cast involved (Wikipedia 2006).
Lloyd Newson and Mike Leigh: on Spotlight
To establish the director’s methods and styles, there is a need to briefly tackle some useful whereabouts of the two world-class directors.
Lloyd Newson is the founder member, dance choreographer and director of the DV8 Physical Theatre. Among his all DV8's work, he handled the direction and also performed in the stage productions such as Bein' A Part, Lonely Art (1985), My Sex, Our Dance (1986), eLeMeNt(h)ree sex (1987), Deep End (1987), and Dead Dreams of Monochrome Men (1988) in which he performed in film the year after (DV8 Physical Theatre Website 2005).
From 1986, Newson's work as the Director of DV8 Physical Theatre has contributed a “dynamic impact on contemporary dance by challenging the traditional aesthetics and forms that pervade most modern and classical dance” (DV8 Physical Theatre Website 2005). Additionally, the important aspect of this test is “his personal rejection of abstraction in dance with his concentration on connecting meaning to movement” (DV8 Physical Theatre Website 2005) and in addressing current social issues.
Mike Leigh, on the other hand is a renowned award-winning British film and theatre director who worked with plays and films such as Secret and Lies (1997) and Topsy Turvy (1999) (Wikipedia 2006; British Council Website on www.contemporarywriters.com). He is known for his commitment to realism and humanism as portrayed in his stage plays Smelling A Rat (1989), It’s A Great Big Shame, Greek Tragedy, Goose-Pimples (1982), Ecstacy (1989), and Abigail’s Party (1979) (British Council Website on www.contemporarywriters.com). Further, his stage work is generally focused on hopeless yet humorous satirical middle-class manners and attitudes . He is also more sarcastic, harsh, and in some ways aggressively unsubtle in the service of a larger point about the ordinariness of society. This identity is at least defined by the behavior of the "ordinary" people in his plays. Last year, Leigh returned to directing for the stage after many years absence with his new play Two Thousand Years at the Royal National Theatre in London (Wikipedia 2006).
Aspects of Directing: an Analysis
There are three important aspects of directing that are discussed in this paper. These aspects will serve as the foundation in analysing the methodologies and signatures of the previously mentioned directors.
Approaches
Style of leadership - The director who uses his/her authority cautiously and applying the best psychological principles of leadership, which include welcoming and encouraging creative contributions from others, consulting with his/her staff before making decisions, explaining his/her reasons rather than being arbitrary, respecting the special talents and training of his/her staff, and giving the entire team a sense of participation in the creative process is an essential directorial trait. Basing it from mental interpretations, Lloyd Newson style in leadership is collaborative. It is shown in his efforts to involve every character of the production. He can be regarded to be under the two categories of exercise of leadership – actual and potential because he can be both leader and follower. Meanwhile, Mike Leigh is also the same with Newson. Generally, directors play roles at such diverse venues that will show distinct modes of interaction, authority, and responsibility (Berger & Luere 1998).
Use of text, Interpretation and Technique within rehearsal - Directors do the play from their own perspective (Berger 1994). Newson and Leigh applied such general theory in theatre direction. Berger (1994) believes that may it be good, bad, indifferent, or shallow or deep, it is a singular production that evolves from the talents and personalities rehearsing it. In their own interpretation of texts, a director must determine which directions are actually the playwright's and which are the stage manager's notes from the initial production (Cox 1996). They hold some freedom in modifying directions. If someone does not have the facilities and equipment to do what is asked, he or she must choose how best to achieve the effect that is wanted. It is important to be consistent with the overall production, and his or her decisions must be text supported, but it is probably better to change directions if they cannot be done effectively and well. During rehearsals, the director uses different methods of improvisation. They facilitate the extraction of the creative juices of actors by means of internalization, research and experimentation. Today, with the emergence of contemporary changes in theatre (Wilson & Goldfarb 2001), directors adapt some techniques in using and interpretation of text and even within rehearsal.
Newson’s signatures on these aspects are revolving in the principle of beauty, research, and experimentation. In the use of text and interpretation, he believes in beauty as the breadth of human experience. As shown in his choreography of dances, he focuses on real actions rather than abstractions. For example, in Bound to Please, he let a 70-year old woman naked onstage to portray beauty. (Butterworth & Clarke 1998) In the same play, there is a whole section where they just use heads; other sections where they just use arms, or the torso, looking at isolated parts of the body, rather than thinking that the whole body has to move in a fluid, connected manner. “Connecting meaning to movement is what it is all about.” (Butterworth & Clarke 1998) His high regard for research and development paves way to some experimentation. By using the findings, and observations that he have, he develops changes on techniques during rehearsals. He basically plays with ideas and metaphors (Butterworth & Clarke 1998).
Mike Leigh freely uses text according to his own interpretation. In an interview with him, he said: “I do what I do to create a play, which I then set down in a text. But they (actors) are doing a play - a very structured play - which exists, and which has all kinds of resonances which, if you mess about with the text or the action in any organic way, will fall apart.” (Coen 1995, p. 11) During rehearsals, he normally let his team to do the same theatrical principles regardless of the type of production.
Impact of audience - The relationship of the director to the audience is to make sure that the performance will have shown the play script’s intent - to agitate, to amuse, to alert, to pacify, or to alienate. In professional theatre, directors must listen to audiences and adjust problematic spots in the staging (Berger 1994). Generally, the director studies all aspects related to people. Both directors are concerned with the audience’s needs and satisfaction. As a general rule in theatre, the measurement of effectiveness of a director is dependent on the audience’s feedbacks and later evaluation of performance. Therefore, they follow the general theory of audience – to please them.
Casting - In some cases the producer delivers casting choices (Cox 1996). If the playwright is a participant, he/she will usually have definite opinions as to who should or should not be cast. It should be remembered, however, that the director is the one who will be working the most closely with the actors. In additions, his/her experience may often lead to the workable choice, as there is much more involved than merely the "right" look (Cox 1996). From constant research and experimentation, Newson is described to be very much open to all kinds of performers – may it be fat or thin, tall or small, and regardless of physical appearance. But the most important qualification for him is that the person can justify and follow the principles of art, dance and theatre in particular (Butterworth & Clarke 1998). For Leigh, same as Newson, he does not necessarily discriminate when casting. He believes that everyone is a good actor and because of his standard in extensive improvisation, every actor can reach their potentials when they undergone such exercise (Coen 1995).
Methods
The blocking process, moves and motivation – Newson stand in the convention of reality and beauty. He takes openness to changes and risk-taking. Leigh, on the other hand is conformist in practice. Moves in Newson’s works are towards a large degree of fights against uniformity (Butterworth & Clarke 1998). Hence, it is always developing in a creative manner and striving for something new at times. Leigh’s moves still lie to his genuine and innate talent of directing based and conformed in the traditional belief of theatre arts. Motivation is personal in nature for both directors. Some directors excel at helping actors with character motivation. Yet at times directors may need to help actors find what drives their characters; in even more instances, the director may need to help actors project that motivating impulse to the audience. (Berger & Luere 1998)
Realism and stylisation – Newson is a realist and an amalgam of the negotiator-creative artist-confrontationalist styles of directing. This is supported with the above discussion of research and experimentation (Butterworth & Clarke 1998). Meanwhile, Leigh is also realist and could be considered to fall under the creative artist style of directing. His commitment to humanism and realism are quite parallel to his character (Wikipedia 2006).
Focus, rhythm, attack and tempo – In the theater, as well as in all artistic endeavors, the only thing that counts is the work itself and the need to go on with it to the highest possible level, with the most personal concentration (Schneider 1986). That is the reason why most directors put emphasis on focus. They work hard to justify and balance the necessary elements of production. Newson consider making thing clear and fighting them to be specific and detailed (Butterworth & Clarke 1998). Leigh still holds on to the general practice of directing with particular exemption on his ultimate trademark – lengthy improvisations.
Use of "stage picture" – Aesthetics, economics, and availability influence the direction of Newson and Leigh together with the other essential elements of production. This is interdependent to the genre of production they are making. Normally, to give the play life and endurance, directors takes a creative bent and painstaking planning. Directors develop their blueprint for decor, costuming, and style of presentation.
Skills
Analytical – Newson is systematic in terms of intention, focus, and subtext. Because he holds a great regard on research and experiments, he acquired new skills that are useful to practice and directed to progression. On the other hand, Leigh is still known for his system in extensive improvisations. As directors, the total result of the actions must be quality and complete in accordance to the real definition of art.
Organisation – With the well documented accounts of successful theatrical productions, it is undeniably visible that the organisational skills in theatre management of the two directors are valuable. Together with the innate knowledge and the gift of art present to them, the communal belief they have as agents of arts is continuously developing and leads to effective human communication. They both possess the crucial traits of a good director, leader, follower, and workforce for the maximum realisation of the arts.
Interpersonal - A director would have a different cast, a different space, a different production staff, so not only would it be impossible to copy a previous staging, but in order to be counterproductive to the purpose of theatre. Theatre is at its best when done in collaborative effort (Cox 1996). Cox deemed that “any director who did not take advantage of his designers and staff in discovering the play and its possibilities jeopardize the likelihood of missing out on the full potential of the play.” Newson and Leigh are directors who are gifted with effective interpersonal skills in directing as seen in the success of their masterpieces (Butterworth & Clarke 1998; Coen 1995).
Artistic – Creativity is one of the most vital traits of a director as well as actors. “There are no substitutes for the talent of the actors and the skill of the director” (Kahn, et al.). These directors – Newson and Leigh pointed the relationship and general functions of all the elements of theatre production especially in their plays. Aesthetics, economics, and availability of facilities affect the direction and other elements of production. However, Newson and Leigh believe that the mentioned factors are not to be considered as major ones. The most important factor must be the script itself and the requirements it makes in direction and interpretation.
No comments:
Post a Comment