Will you PLEASE be quiet??!!

Jo Somerville wrote:
>
> I honestly cannot believe Geoff did that! I have worked with him before and i thought he would have more respect for the play he was performing and acting on the whole!! It is insane to say it is appropriate to break character and ruin the moment for the audience because you cant concentrate!! If you can't keep focus whilst a few people are talking then you should have rehearsed more, been more in character or dare i say it- learn how to act professionaly! The correct behaviour is to continue and while backstage alert a staff member and they will get an usher ask the audience members to leave.
Well, thats just my two cents
-Jo




Sorry Jo, but I can't say that I agree with you there at all.

I admire what Geoff did and think he would never have let it occur unless he felt there was damn good reason and the moment was being ruined for the audience anyway. Having made that decision, what he did was by far the quickest, most efficient, and respectful way to deal with it for all concerned, and the fact that he could step straight back into character probably shows how rehearsed and in command he actually was.


The 'polite' members of the audience, respecting that it's already being made difficult for the performer, were probably reticent to speak up, for fear of creating a further disturbance. So the problem gets put up with, in hope it will dwindle of its own accord; but meanwhile everyone suffers.
I really can't see an usher dealing with anyone in a less disruptive manner than Geoff did...can you honestly? How does an usher surreptitiously get to a patron in the centre of the auditorium? Chinese whispers? I'm sure it would draw my attention, away from the poor actor. Give that job to the one who already has the attention, and who will then fast win it back.


The audience wants to see the action unfold, to be in the moment and be lost in the story. But at the same time, we ALL know it's a play. The audience is a participant as much as the performers are. That's partly why we are annoyed by those who don't seem to know the protocol; it's also why it's surprisingly easy after a disruption (a lighting failure, a prop breaking, an ad-libbed line) for us all to straightaway get back on with it and pretend it didn't happen. After all, we're only pretending that it IS happening.

With all the focus on an actor on stage, if I see them so in control of that focus that they can break their routine to clean up an accidental spill, or to cover for a technical mishap, or even to address the audience ad-lib; and all the while either not losing character, or picking it straight back up where it was lost, I am more fascinated by the power they yield.
When an actor is concentrating so hard on giving a "perfect", as-rehearsed performance, that they somehow don't even react to a chair that was knocked over, or a lighting gel accidentally falling onstage, or people chatting rudely in the auditorium, it distracts me because it seems "fake".


People sometimes need to be reminded that they're not watching television, they can't just talk through the commercials and that the actors CAN hear you. There's nothing more powerful than to have an actor acknowledge his audience and actually speak TO them, not just AT them. If it's to deal with a problem, we're more likely to cheer the actor, and then give them even more respect by letting them get back to their story.


Anecdotes...

I wish I'd taken advantage of a situation during Stories From Suburban Road, when a mobile phone went off and continued ringing during my scene, playing a professor in his study criticising a student's work. I just continued, trying to focus, but pretty well knew that all the emotional effect of my scene was lost because neither I nor the audience could concentrate on anything but the dickhead with the "Flintstones" ringtone.
I realised (too late) that had I stopped, in character of the professor, and said something along the lines of "Do you mind? I'm trying to read; take your toy and play outside", I would have 1) retained my character's status and not lost the emotional content of the scene, 2) dealt with the distraction by acknowledging it, and 3) earned myself points with the audience who were no doubt thinking the same thing.


A great opportunity came up in a Barking Gecko performance of "Way Home", where Derek Nannup and I, playing tough streetkids, had a scene transition where we improvised some audience interaction, often stealing the running shoes off a kid in the audience. Just prior to this scene, a mobile phone went off. Derek (professional clown that he is) realised we weren't going to gain anything by finishing our dialogue scene, so he just cut it, went straight to the transition scene, and ran down and stole the mobile phone. The beaut payback was he not only improvised some dialogue with the poor person on the other end, but when they hung up he called a number of his own and had a conversation at the phoneowner's expense, with the rest of the audience gleefully in on the joke!



More along the lines of dealing with noisy audiences:


I think I speak with authority in this matter because of the thousands of shows I have performed in schools. Kids, especially the very young, often have no concept at all of theatre protocol. They talk to themselves, to their teachers, and to the performers.

The classic example is the pantomime "he's behind you!". If you ignore them, you only get warned louder. If you deny them ("oh, no he isn't")...we all know what the response will be. Fine, if that's what you want.
The ONLY way to deal with distractions like this is to address them, acknowledge them, and agree with them, before you can get on with it.

There have been times when kids are mucking about, heckling and spoiling it for the others. For some reason, teachers (like your ushers) are a bit powerless to step in. But the troublemakers respond straightaway if an actor talks to them like a teacher would, stopping the play. The focus is suddenly on their behaviour, and they're too embarassed to continue. It depends on the type of distraction (and the type of character) whether the actor can succesfully remain in character or needs to drop out altogether.

The best way is obviously to remain in character, and not to disrupt the play. Sometimes the action is too important to let drop, so the problem is ignored until a more suitable moment arrives, when it can perhaps be incorporated more naturally.

In "The Emperor's New Clothes", when Ingle Knight came out as the Emperor in his underwear, kids would try to save him: "You've got no clothes on!...You've got no clothes on!"...as soon as one starts, they'd all start, and not only could he not shout them down, but his character isn't really allowed to acknowledge his own folly.
In another play, "Jenny Goes Wild", my character of Ranger Kev was looking for someone who was hiding. The kids knew where she was ("She's under there!..), but if I'd found her, that'd pretty well be the end of the play.
In both these cases I'd have to get out front, take off my character's hat and talk to them as Craig Williams, actor. I'd acknowledge them and say, "yes, WE know , but Ranger Kev/The Emperor doesn't know YET in this story...let's see what happens".

This may seem a bit playschool, but in every case, the kids were satisfied and had NO trouble at all in focussing their attention back in on the story, as if nothing had happened.

I would suggest the response is virtually no different with Geoff Kelso's audiences, and that his command of an adult audience is what ultimately marks his action as 'how to act professionally'.


Cheers,
Craig

[%sig%]