how far would you go as an actor?
Tue, 22 Jan 2002, 05:46 pmWalter Plinge38 posts in thread
how far would you go as an actor?
Tue, 22 Jan 2002, 05:46 pmReally, this is the nudity question all over again... but I don't want it to descend into the fracas it usually does (got that, Leah?). :o)>
I am considering putting in a play to the Blue Room this year that requires four young people (2 guys, 2 girls - all twenty-somethings) to appear fully nude and in highly explicit (simulated, obviously) sex scenes.
It is a serious early play by a major American playwright, dealing with the fractured nature of human relationships and the idea that no matter how close we get to one another, we are all -- essentially -- alone.
(That quote from Albert Schweitzer comes to mind on this... I may well use that in the programme!)
In other words, it's not a cynical, exploitative flesh-fest, but deadly serious piece of theatre needing a dedicated, emotionally mature young cast.
Therein lies the rub... does such a thing exist anymore? Can I realistically hope to cast this show, or would every suitable young actor be too terrified of a room full of strangers scrutinising their privates?
How far are actors (male and female) prepared to go these days, and for the right play (which this one is), would they go the whole hog?
Are you out there, or is this just a pipe-dream?
peace,
David M.
I am considering putting in a play to the Blue Room this year that requires four young people (2 guys, 2 girls - all twenty-somethings) to appear fully nude and in highly explicit (simulated, obviously) sex scenes.
It is a serious early play by a major American playwright, dealing with the fractured nature of human relationships and the idea that no matter how close we get to one another, we are all -- essentially -- alone.
(That quote from Albert Schweitzer comes to mind on this... I may well use that in the programme!)
In other words, it's not a cynical, exploitative flesh-fest, but deadly serious piece of theatre needing a dedicated, emotionally mature young cast.
Therein lies the rub... does such a thing exist anymore? Can I realistically hope to cast this show, or would every suitable young actor be too terrified of a room full of strangers scrutinising their privates?
How far are actors (male and female) prepared to go these days, and for the right play (which this one is), would they go the whole hog?
Are you out there, or is this just a pipe-dream?
peace,
David M.
RE: how far would you go as an actor?
Thu, 31 Jan 2002, 12:24 pmWalter Plinge
>You put yourself out there with a question about
>how far people would go on stage, knowing FULL
>WELL that this would become a discussion about nudity.
I had rather hoped it would become a discussion about the play.
Instead, some of you, including some who should know me better (and who even acknowledge as much) have assumed that my motives are less than pure.
In projecting her indoctrinated cultural assumptions about male heterosexual directors requesting nudity, Amanda has -- whether deliberately (ie: it was a joke, Joyce) or not -- successfully managed to negate two years of personal acquaintanceship with me and my work as a director.
My work as a director is motivated by nothing more than a desire to create outstanding work... work that will hopefully generate excitement about theatre here in Perth, and in doing so perhaps play some small part in rejuvenating our terminally ill theatrical community. To suggest otherwise is to insult my integrity as an artist.
>I have attempted to be, as requested, fracas-free
For which I am grateful.
>and, with huge amounts of effort, I believe suceeded
>relatively well considering my strong veiws on the topic.
May I respectfully suggest that these pre-assumed "strong views", by default, prevent you from having an objective, open-minded debate on the subject?
>like it or not, when you express your veiws (as you did
>so eloquently and in detail when asked why you wanted
>to do the play) you have to be prepared for people to argue
>with you.
Absolutely. But not to point of questioning my personal integrity and calling me a "sleaze".
>To argue with your arguments AND with you as a person.
Rubbish, Leah. Who I am as a person has nothing to do with it. If you like the play, and agree with my take on it, you do it. End of story.
If I'm sleazy in the rehearsal room... then fine, feel free to make it a factor. But otherwise -- and this is a serious question -- what the hell difference does it make?
>How far would I go on stage?
>It seems that, like a lot of people, I can't answer
>that question until I have totally considered the play,
Which only one person thus far has asked to read.
>the director
Who has a fine track record, a proven reputation, and who even his most vociferously critical occasional collaborator acknowledges is someone worth working with.
>the probable audience
The smart, hip, intellectually capable crowd at the Blue Room.
>the pay packet
Like all fringe experimental theatre in Perth - tiny.
David M.
Thou pox-marked folly-fallen moldwarp!
>how far people would go on stage, knowing FULL
>WELL that this would become a discussion about nudity.
I had rather hoped it would become a discussion about the play.
Instead, some of you, including some who should know me better (and who even acknowledge as much) have assumed that my motives are less than pure.
In projecting her indoctrinated cultural assumptions about male heterosexual directors requesting nudity, Amanda has -- whether deliberately (ie: it was a joke, Joyce) or not -- successfully managed to negate two years of personal acquaintanceship with me and my work as a director.
My work as a director is motivated by nothing more than a desire to create outstanding work... work that will hopefully generate excitement about theatre here in Perth, and in doing so perhaps play some small part in rejuvenating our terminally ill theatrical community. To suggest otherwise is to insult my integrity as an artist.
>I have attempted to be, as requested, fracas-free
For which I am grateful.
>and, with huge amounts of effort, I believe suceeded
>relatively well considering my strong veiws on the topic.
May I respectfully suggest that these pre-assumed "strong views", by default, prevent you from having an objective, open-minded debate on the subject?
>like it or not, when you express your veiws (as you did
>so eloquently and in detail when asked why you wanted
>to do the play) you have to be prepared for people to argue
>with you.
Absolutely. But not to point of questioning my personal integrity and calling me a "sleaze".
>To argue with your arguments AND with you as a person.
Rubbish, Leah. Who I am as a person has nothing to do with it. If you like the play, and agree with my take on it, you do it. End of story.
If I'm sleazy in the rehearsal room... then fine, feel free to make it a factor. But otherwise -- and this is a serious question -- what the hell difference does it make?
>How far would I go on stage?
>It seems that, like a lot of people, I can't answer
>that question until I have totally considered the play,
Which only one person thus far has asked to read.
>the director
Who has a fine track record, a proven reputation, and who even his most vociferously critical occasional collaborator acknowledges is someone worth working with.
>the probable audience
The smart, hip, intellectually capable crowd at the Blue Room.
>the pay packet
Like all fringe experimental theatre in Perth - tiny.
David M.
Thou pox-marked folly-fallen moldwarp!
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···