Will you PLEASE be quiet??!!

Hey Bill, sorry for the lateness of reply but I had to go to Belgium for a few days and I only got back last night.







Lets see, you wrote:


>Well...A couple of times you actually DO seem to agree with my statements, and you disagree with what Jo said, as I did.


Well, I never thought my comments were meant to counter everything you wrote or I would have started with

‘but I cant say that I agree with you there AT ALL.’

Of course I donÂ’t expect an audience member to help with crowd control, itÂ’s not their job (though itÂ’s lovely when it happens. Go brave, polite audience member go!).

But I do expect ushers and stage managers to get involved at appropriate times, i.e. before the show starts or at intervals. There should be good communication between those on stage and those off to help identify potential problems and help the show run smoothly which I thought was the point Jo was making.
Remember, stage mangers have God like powers, they can see in the dark, become invisible if they have too, anticipate mishaps before they manifest and they wear fashionable black at all times so they go with everything. ItÂ’s good to have them on your side.

And of course I think Geoff Kelso is a professional! He is a consummate performer, a paragon of virtue upon the stage and well worth seeing in action when ever possible. If only he were a breakfast cereal, then all young hopefuls could start the day with a big bowl of acting enriched Kelso! And I think this was the other point Jo was making.

I can see that Jo SomervilleÂ’s comments were perhaps terse (please stop me if IÂ’m typing words in your mouth Jo) but generally I felt they were born from a sense of shock.
My first clue was Jo’s opening comment ‘I honestly cannot believe Geoff did that!’
Neither could I. Stopping the show because someone was talking. Would he storm off to his trailer next?
JoÂ’s outrage, which I share, is the thought that an actor would stop for something that although annoying, is fairly trivial. This is the point I was trying to make Craig.

Jo also wrote ‘It is insane to say it is appropriate to break character and ruin the moment for the audience because you cant concentrate!!’
Well, I agree with that statement but I never wrote that you or Geoff had advocated this as a course of action on stage so lets nip that one in the bud.

Infact, before continuing I would like to say although this is ‘Green room gossip’, Chinese whispers is a lousy game. I’d like to stop banding the good name of Mr Kelso about except to say that it was only used to open a discussion on dealing with disruptions during performance, which I think makes a good topic for this forum.





I think ‘Anything to avoid a greater disruption’ is a given (unless you performing Artoe)

When an actor stops performing and talks to the audience, in my mind, the show has stopped. It’s like putting a huge footprint in the middle of a Japanese sand garden. It stops the ‘flow’, stands out and grates on the nerves.
Therefore the only time an actor SHOULD do this is when the show HAS to stop for whatever reason and that reason has to be more than just someone talking or kids getting excited. Why does the actor have to break character for anything less?


You raise the point of what to do if your character is low status, well I guess you’d have to be inventive. Being low status doesn’t mean you are nothing but a piece of furniture on the stage! (Unless you’re playing the part of a piece of furniture) As for plot line, I’m talking about pulling the focus back to the performance, not revealing ‘who done it’

In the end I don’t see how dealing with a problem in character ‘actually’ destroys your character as you stated. By definition, anything you do in character will be characterful.

In order to keep the integrity of the play (which I feel is the most important), staying in character, solving the problem, and then continuing on actually DOESNÂ’T cause such a big disturbance, as you seem to think.

To put it another way, If you leave your character to solve a problem then try and return to form, you WILL produce a disturbance in the force and as a registered Jedi you should know this!

As for the story about picking up the kid. I mentioned that to illustrate my point, it was not a suggested response to use every time. Whenever you have to move beyond the confines of the rehearsed play because of a disruption, by staying in character you can reduce the severity of the problem.




What a difference your ranger Kev story makes when you mention that Craig the storyteller was also a character already known to the kids. An excellent way to handle a problem by reverting to another character. ItÂ’s a testimony to Grahame GavinÂ’s experience in theatre to have thought of that as a possible response to a predicted situation.

And I think this helps to make my point. You never DROPPED your character! You changed it, but you didnÂ’t stop the show. You say that ranger Kev couldnÂ’t do it but you still managed to solve the problem as a character, not as an actor whoÂ’s just on stage doing a job. The integrity of the play was maintained. You hit a bump but you smoothed it out instead of stopping and starting. Very professional Mr. Williams.

You wrote ‘If we realise that the character usually wouldn't say this, but tonight the actor made something up ‘in character’ - that's when we are impressed.’ Isn’t this what I’ve been saying?




THE PARADOX OF AD-LIBS...



Your right, ad-libs are fun (when well executed) and special for an audience. ItÂ’s what live theatre is about; the spontaneity of the moment and it draws attention to the SKILL of the actor.

You said, ‘If an actor makes a bad ad-lib (inappropriate to the play or out of character), all it does is draw attention to the actor and away from the story, and distract the audience by reminding us that we are watching a play.’
YES. Stopping the show to say ‘will you please be quiet’ is the worst ad-lib you could ever make!

As for your paradox;
Ultimately you are saying that ad-libs draw attention to the actor as a person. Yes.
Stopping the performance to ask someone to be quiet draws attention to the actor as a person.
Which would you prefer to see?

I think the issue weÂ’re carving up is; if something goes wrong, at what point do you stop acting? When do you cross that threshold? IÂ’d like to think never if possible.

I know there will never be a simple answer. There are far to many variables to take into account at any one time on stage. An actor has to rely on their own judgment, tempered in the fires of experiences, honed by rehearsal and above all, shielded by their embodiment of character.





The show must flow.



Brett





PS Jen says Hi. IÂ’ll be in Oxford for a few weeks so I may not be able to reply straight away if you wish to carry on the debate Craig but I hope others will write about their experiences in this area as it is an interesting problem every performer will have to face at some point. Thanks Leah for bringing it up.