I've read this play before, and I saw it last year. Something that is simultaneously a hazard and a perk of taking multiple theatre classes is that it is nearly impossible not to study the same play more than once. At the time that The New Orleans Monologues went up last year I was in a class with Geoff Proehl who was the dramaturg and director for the piece. Needless to say, that meant that Rosalind came in to talk to our class and we heard from Geoff in addition to having required attendance of the production (which I would have happily gone to see multiple times voluntarily.) I thoroughly enjoy the monologue style of playwrighting. The slight dabbling that I have done in the genre of plays has been in monologuing style. I like having the constant stream of Elaine's character throughout the play. She ties everything together. Elaine's character makes the piece feel more cohesive than it might without her through line being present. I remember when I saw the production that my mind was a little bit boggled by the sheer numbers of lines that the woman playing Elaine had to memorize. It was rather amazing, and my respect for her was immense. Just thinking about having to memorize that many lines makes my palms sweat, and I wonder if as a playwright it is really fair to have one character carry that much of a show, with that much memorizational responsibility. As an actor experimenting in playwrighting, I don't know that I would feel comfortable hoisting that onto one person. So here I am in the middle of a little bit of a connundrum. I like the continuity that the character of Elaine provides, but I wish that that through line could be present without the worry that whoever was playint that intensly leading role would become totally overwhelmed and chaotic. I think that Bell does a lovely job building characters. Each character is really vivid and, although they all have things in common, each character is profoundly different and you can read it in the dialect or coloquialisms that accompany what they say in addition to in the stories that they tell. I know from hearing Bell speak before that part of the intent of the piece was to tell or imagine the stories that had been glossed over when the media covered Katrina. I think that using characters from dozens of different walks of life in the play illustrated the nature of the crsis much better than one walk of life could ever hope to do.
On that note, plays about crisis are interesting. I like to think that creating in response to a crisis whether it is through fine visual arts or dance or theatre, helps a society and the individuals encompassed in that title process and recover from the situation.
Having the monologues intersperssed with little snatches of dialogue added to the vivid nature of the piece, and kept the audience on their toes by jumping in and out of characters heads as well as in and out of real time. A series of monologues that were just monologues would be boring, but having dialogue that breaks up the monotony keeps viewers invested and interested.
Overall, I really like The New Orleans Monologues both on the page and in person. I remember the audience being engaged throughout the play and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it again from a different perspective.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You raise an interesting point here Ella about how much it's reasonable to ask one person to do on stage, and I think that applies broadly -- too much to memorize is just as bad as too much to anything (too violent sword fighting or too many costume changes or too much dancing or too much whatever). You are right and wise to be thinking about production issues, and especially about feasibility, even at the early stages. That said, different actors, as you know, work different ways. Some people memorize large swaths of text easily (personally, I have no idea how). The director and the actors will help you edit your play for the stage. Some actors train as monologuers. It can be done. (Think one-woman and one-man shows.) So write away on your through narrative if you like, and worry about finding someone to memorize it later. Monologues, among other things, work okay with scripts in hand. That said, it seems to me that your already-conceived monologue project, which I think is brilliant, is going to lend itself better to a Vagina Monologues or Laramie approach than New Orleans' model.
ReplyDeleteElla,
ReplyDeleteI really like how you look at the plays, especially the New Orleans Monologues, from an acting standpoint: the ability to memorize and such. You are great at looking at writing a play from all angles of a production, which is awesome. I also like how you point out when writing about the Vagina Monologues that these monologues are things that people have a need to say, and give the audience the ability to find the strength to talk about taboo issues.
The use of Elaine as a through line for New Orleans is a poignant observation that I agree with. I would have to expand your point to comment that - in my opinion- New Orelans wouldn't work with out her. While Laramie and the Vagina Monologues have overlapping stories and connectors, New Orelans relies upon Elaine to keep the story together. You are right, putting so much responsibility upon one actor could be considered bad planning on a playwright's side but I would argue more along the lines of Laurie's post. There are many shows in which one actor is asked to carry a large burden in lines or stage time or importance to a plot. Take Beckett's Happy Days for example. It is a two and a half hour show (edited) performed by One woman buried up to her waist in sand for the first act and up to her neck in the second act. Now That might be asking a bit much from an actress and yet the show is brilliant. I would say, while it is nice to consider the actor's needs as a playwright sometimes the best thing for both play and performer is just simply writing the way the Play needs and let the actor figure out how to perform it later.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed how you incorporated your own personal experience into your insights of the monologues. I think it really helps support your statements and your ideas about acting.
ReplyDeleteI also really enjoyed your idea about crisis- and how when we incorporate a crisis into an art form such as theater, we are therefore in the act of recovery. I'd have to agree.