Karen Finley "Art is Still Threatening"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZAv5C1PzEk

Interpretations and Phases

In giving Not I another go, I am thinking a lot about the pacing that I had in relation to the pacing of others. In originally going into this work, I thought that the sentences were more slow and methodical, which is why I talked about the need to tell the story as being the force that is driving She to speak, to continue despite the noise and despite the implications that she is opening herself up to. I think that having been present for the original conversation might have really helped me in my interpretation of the text, as my pacing was so different from all of the others. I'd also like to explore further how the mouth works with the body despite the body's inability to move. I think that wile She may not be able to move her body, it should still be an active participant in the performance, even if it is just the intent to move that I have mentally. I know that if I actively think it, and try to instill it physically, it will read in my face and, hopefully, then read in my mouth and in my vocation.

On another note, I felt that the phasing in and out of speakers was beautiful. I thought that it really created a chaotic environment for the performer in that you had to really focus and be concrete in your knowledge of the text yet for the observer it was reminiscent of a symphony; words flowing in and out of each other, syncing and un-syncing as the performers went on. This was very intriguing as an observer.

One thing that I did not get to address in our conversation that day that I was really curious about was the religious aspect of it. I'm not sure if Beckett was talking about one religion in particular or if he was targeting experiences with a particular sect of believers. I think that we get hints in his choice of dress and in the nature of his speak about the religious, but I have not found a truly definitive answer as to what religion this is. I'd like to talk more about it today.

Not I process and progress

As far as where we are as a collective, it is really on a spectrum.  Putting the pieces together was an interesting experience due to the fact that (a) half of the class was not present for the initial discussion of the text and (b) everyone was at different stages in their process for the piece.  It was interesting watching the different interpretations of the piece from those of us who were not present for the initial discussion of the text, because it brought a different flow and a different energy to the piece...some of which fit beautifully with the conversation we had had about the text, and some of which did not fit at all.  Additionally, the different levels of comfortability with the text brought an interesting rhythm and feel to the piece. Ironically, I could feel the nervous/anxious tension in the room, in addition to this "need" to get the piece over with and get your particular part over with and out and move on to the next person.  I thought it added tremendously to the piece.  I'll be interested to see what the piece feels like when/if that sense of uncertainty is not as present in the presentations.

As far as how I am individually in the process, I feel a little disjointed.  I'm still finding it difficult to pick up in the middle and fade out in the middle.  I wish there were more opportunities to rehearse with everyone in the group, purely to get a better flow of the piece and to see/feel/hear everyone else and use that energy and incorporate it into my own work.  My piece itself, though, is feeling much more solid than it was last week.  I've tried different tactics to get it into my body (such as standing, sitting, walking around, lying on the floor, going upside down), which helped me concentrate more on the physical things and less on the words, which helped with being able to rapid-fire spit out the text without thinking about it.  Additionally, the more I do the piece, the more I feel as though I'm on a rollercoaster.  The lead in is the rickity climb to the top of the hill, and then I pick up speed very quickly in the middle, and the end stays fast, but it slows down significantly towards the end.  It is an interesting feeling when your mouth seems to be a half second ahead of your brain...almost like it is detached. Can't say I enjoy it, but I did find the not-thinking-about-it-and-just-doing-it part liberating.

Not I... Again

After our rehearsal last week, I felt a bit selfish. In my memorization, I had sort of forgotten that Jackie was layering her text over mine--so when the time came for Jackie to layer over me, I was a bit thrown, and wondered if I should adjust my speed to flow with hers. As I've been rehearsing, I've tried to keep that layering in mind. I wonder if it would be helpful for us to do a sort of line read round robin before we prop up our performance, so that we can get used to layering on top of each other.

The layering has raised some curiosities for me, though: about the multiplicity of the Mouth's identity/memories... different voices over different occasions... tracking the changes, the layerings... There's probably no time for this, but are there occasions of choral speech? When all of our voices come together? How does spreading the Mouth over all of us change the Mouth? Does it crack her/it into different aspects of the same thing? Does it make the Mouth the Mouth of many different people?

I also agree with Tania about how the "best" Mouth is a mix of everything we brought to class. I know I've found myself trying to focus on my mouth's physicality, as Joe did, while also trying to track some of the lovely interior work a few other people did, all while not losing my speed (which I quite like).

I'm still trying to negotiate those moments of what I see as dialogue. I feel the impulse to pause for a breath and listen in those moments, and to register the inaudible input in the speech that follows. For instance, in mine, there's a moment when I say, "what? ... girl? .... yes.... tiny little girl" and I feel the impulse to register this as a correction. Later, when I say "what? ... seventy? ... good God... coming up to seventy..." I register this as a correction and as a moment of... humor? Similar to Krapp's "Nine? Good God."

In my examination of the Mouth's text, I find my text fairly easy to track, because it adheres closely to a timeline: birth... childhood... a sudden focus on a single moment in her seventies... present day. The amount of focus--pretty detailed, sensory focus--on single moments (ie. the early April morning wandering in a field; being in the dark, suspended between buzzing) also helps me to clutch my text, because of how vivid they are. I've found it helpful to divide my text into sections.

I also can't help but notice how... sassy? Wrong word. But biting/sarcastic/witty the Mouth is. I'm thinking of phrases like "no love such as normally vented on the speechless infant," "eight months later almost to the tick..." Crude phrases, harsh phrases, but so juicy, so sharp. I like sinking my mouth into them.

NOT I TAKE 2

I also had the text memorized before last class, but once people started saying their lines around me I lost track of my own since I did not have them as pinned down as I thought. I am making sure to memorize them this time with the speed and intesity that is required of Mouth.

I was struck by the differences in our approaches to Mouth last class. Jackie's Mouth was more internal first-sphere, and Jo focused primarily on the physicality of Mouth. I witnessed different approaches to the character that I would like to incorporate into my piece, and I think the "best" version of Mouth is a mix of Erin's intensity, Jackie's interiority, Jo's physicality, etc, etc. I am trying to absorb the highlilghts of each of our pieces to make Mouth a fuller character.

I am trying to find relationships between the different threads that Mouth juggles and I am finding that concrete images are more helpful for transitioning into a different train of thought. Although I imagine Mouth to function primarily in the second sphere I am also trying to find different flavors of this mental space. Some parts seem more directed towards herself, while others seem very externalized (what? who? No! SHE! SHE!)

First Performance

As Mark said throughout our exercises, performing our "Not I" piece was very different in the space of our classroom than in the comfort of our respective bedrooms. Although I had run through my part many times, I found that I has spent too much time trying to master the material rather than stop and meditate on the formation of the words and the depth of the text as a whole. I enjoyed our exercises where we had to explore different ways of communicating our text, yet oftentimes I found myself lost in the delivery and would forget certain lines. Echoing what Jo has posted, I believe there cannot be true mastery of the performance technique unless the lines themselves are mastered. I suppose my nervousness in my own performance also detracted from this experience quite a bit as well.

I feel like one way we can all move forward in our respective pieces is by focusing more on our mouths. It's uncomfortable to remain deadpan and have our mouths do all the work of expressing emotion and meaning. I know I have to remind myself not to move my hands or furrow my eyebrows to convey the tone, but rather allow my mouth to accentuate and define it. I really feel like our discussions and exercises did bring this to light, but I have to continue practicing.

Research topics for presentations

For Presentations:
The theater after Beckett

Check these out. Use your resources. If you are confused, want guidance, or have a different idea you'd like to run past me, please be in touch. Use the blog to share with each other what you are interested in--hopefully we can negotiate topics and settle things before next class.



Mac Wellman -- american playwright. (also influenced by Stein)

Maria Irene Fornes -- cuban-american playwright/teacher.

Elizabeth LeCompte (The Wooster Group) --  american company/collective)

Stuart Sherman  -- american performance artist, creator of "spectacles" of manipulated obects

Spalding Gray  -- american monologuist (associated w The Wooster Group)

Ping Chong -- chinese-american creator/designer/playwright

Heiner Muller -- german playwright of harsh poetic texts often directed by robert wilson

Robert Wilson -- american director, "theater of images".

David Greenspan -- american playwright

Thomas Bernhard -- austrian playwright. brought attention to austria's nazi past, lived a tortured relationship to his country.

Peter Handke -- austrian playwright, novelist, wrote screenplay with wim wenders for wings of desire.

Athol Fugard -- south african playwright, author of Boesman and Lena, a post-beckett anti-apartheid play

Lee Breuer -- american director/writer, member of mabou mines. early work on beckett as a director then became a writer (theater of images) and creator.

Squat Theater -- collective in exile. important work in the 70s/80s.

Elfriede Jelinek -- nobel winning playwright, novelist. new model of womens' writing? new ideas about author/director relationship...JACKIE currently in NYC

Suzan-Lori Parks -- african-american seven sisters educated writer,also inspired by Stein

Franz Xaver Kroetz -- German writer of political plays

Sam Shepherd -- American movie star playwright also influenced by open theater, beat writing, american geography

Richard Foreman -- American post-modern theory influenced writer/designer

Karen Finley -- American monologuist of the 1980s, denounced by right-wing politicians for her obscene material

Naomi Iizuka -- American writer of new plays

Charles Mee -- collage plays, American

First "Performance"... What?... Who?... No!... Ours!

I sensed that each individual had a rather distinct relationship with the text - namely where it originated in the body and how it lived in space.  We are all mouths.  During the run-through I wanted to be able to focus as best I could on the experience of the mouths in the circle.  It became super difficult to do that with the copious head movements that many of us had for various reasons.  I also found myself becoming interested in the varying levels of emoting that was happening with the rest of the face.  The words lived in each of our moths quite uniquely.  For me this was the "action" of the text - how do the words shape the experience of the mouth.

Knowing the text through and through is certainly requisite for experiencing the semi-non-volitional torrent effect of the text and our next step as collaborators would be to continue placing the text in our bodies to be actually regurgitated.  I still sensed a bunch more collateral action in the rest of our bodies that I imagine want to be coaxed into the mouth.  Continued work might be - animating MOUTH - unbelievably intense chewing of the words - and allowing the text to be less cerebral and/or volitional.

Until next time,

-Jo

Handy Rehearsal

As an actor, in grappling with a text, I always go back to actions. What is the character trying to do with each line? What is driving them to speak? This has been my biggest obstacle in creating this work. I think that with this play, I started out thinking about "oatmeal" verbs when describing my actions to myself- things like "I want to discuss, I want to reveal," but I think that there is way more in the text that I have yet to uncover. What I need now is repetition, repetition of my segment of text in connection to the whole play. A big question that I asked myself, what is the character's objective in telling this story or even talking at all? If I can fully answer these questions, I think that I will be in much better equipped to bring this play to life.

Another thing that has been an obstacle is my curiosity. I am really fighting the urge to search online for other people's interpretations of the text. I generally like to read the play that i'm working on and watch other productions of it in order to study how others understand it and perform it; I generally think that is a beneficial thing for me to do. In this case, I think that it would detract from my raw interpretation of the play and influence me and my piece in a negative way. I do not want to go and watch others perform this play because I think that I will draw too much of my inspiration for my individual work form other people and that process happens unconsciously. The pacing, like others have said, is a place where I feel like I can take artistic liberties. I don't think that it was meant to really be a play of omissions, but if not, why are they included so frequently and what do they do to the actor/audience. And in watching other productions of the play, I think their pacing of words will influence me the most.

Long story short, I need to play more with stronger actions and find out how the play manifests itself within me - including how the words flow or don't flow out of my mouth.

Not I Rehearsal Process

At first I read the entire text out loud. Then I broke it up into beats and sentences so that I could track Mouth's thoughts. Kat C and I read through our shared text together and through repetition helped to memorize it. Alone, I recorded the entire text in GarageBand and would listen to sections, repeat them and then check for accuracy, in this way stringing together the monologue. After I felt I had memorized a sentence or two, I would go back and run the monologue from an earlier point. Once I felt more solid, I would run the monologue from the beginning and see if I still remembered the section I thought I had memorized from more of a distance.

Thoughts about questions:

Who is this character? Mouth seems to be the victim of an extremely traumatic event which has rendered her mostly mute and emotionally crippled. This traumatic event involved a man and a (now dead?) baby. Potentially a rape or a relationship that went badly. From the breeches reference, seems likely that sexual violence was involved.

People of the town she lives in seem to accommodate her speechlessness.

Why does she say these things? Once or twice a year, words flow from her. It seems like these words need to be released as part of a healing or exorcising process related to her past trauma.

What happens during this play? Mouth can't hold in her pain any longer and her broken words flow from her. A stranger listens and attempts to comfort(?) at points, but comforting in the face of such brokenness is not possible.

What is she trying to achieve/achieving by saying what she does? I think she's trying to free or rid herself from her demons in a ritualistic process (once or twice a year, always winter) but is unsuccessful as the attempt to cleanse herself starts to reinforce the trauma in a cycle - she wants to forget but through trying to forget she remembers and is further traumatized.

What do I need as a performer to be able to find and perform this role? A good memory... empathy.

Not I Process...

I initially started out the process by reading the text out loud to myself. It seemed like a logical place to start. Especially after last Wednesday's class, the text became much more manageable and accessible, and less of a daunting “how do I deal with these words on paper?” task. I tried different rates of speed…seeing how fast or slow reading affected the work.  Since we discussed the sense of urgency last class, I wanted to experiment a little bit with seeing whether or not urgency could be achieved without spewing the text at a warp-speed.  I found it to be a challenge, however I also found that it was a lot less manic, which almost made it a little bit more foreboding.

Actually memorizing the text, however, was a completely different ball game.  It was particularly difficult because I had to grapple with the different rhythmic patterns of the words on the page.  But after several hours of playing around with different sentence cadences (if you can call them sentences), it finally clicked.

I found myself using more of my musical senses more than anything in grappling with this piece. It felt as though each phrase had its own rhythm, its own musicality, etc.  Some lines were faster than others.  Some were slower than others.  I also found that in trying to take the lines at a quicker pace, it was easier for me to think about learning them in sort of musical phrases, then put the phrases together, and smooth out the transition between the phrases.  In summation, thinking of “Not I” as a musical piece without a tune has helped me get into the piece and work with it a lot easier.

The only obstacles I’ve consistently experienced is my consistent need to create images in my head to remember the words on the page, and sometimes there just simply is not an image to be had.  Without cue lines, or a through story, it has made conquering this piece a particular challenge (especially when you’re dealing with a section in the middle, like me).

NOT I

Memorizing this text is really difficult. I, like Megan, also find myself rocking back and forth like a crazy person, and for some reason it really helps me get the words out--maybe its something to do with the rhythm of the text? I tried to stop rocking while reciting and not only could I not remeber the words as well, but I also developed other neurotic habits to compensate. I tried saying the words with my eyes shut and that didnt work for me either (I was trying to embody the mouth more by lessening my other senses). Like others have pointed out I am also nervous about the pacing of the text since we talked about the urgency of escaping thoughts by speaking over them. I tend to say these words slower because the text is so scattered, but I am trying to find images or words that link what I have identified as different sections together, and hopefully this helps with the pacing.

I am trying to really separate my mouth from other parts of my body; I am trying to emphasize and explore the way words situate themselves in the mouth. I am hoping to reach a point where my body is still and relaxed while my mouth performs various word acrobatics with ease. I have found that some of the theater exercises we do for mainstage--like the one where we target a specific body part and internally inspect it--are very useful.

happy memorizing to us.

Mouth

M o u t h  - a great word

I have been trying to let the words dance around in my mouth.  Each segment engages my mouth in a distinct series of shapes and playful relations to the text.  In memorizing the text via chewing the words over and over, I am really memorizing the patterns of movement in my mouth and their associations with those before and after more than the verbiage of the text itself.  I am considering the muscular suggestions of the word-sounds to be the blocking of the piece for a fully embodied mouth.  I am trying to find my body at perfect rest so that I can focus experiencing this piece as solely through the mouth as possible.  

In each segment there are a few strongly associative words that begin to string together a chain of associations for me as I read/learn which - I think more retrospectively than else - generates what feels like a dynamically coherent narrative.  That's great.  I think more than anything so far, that is what I appreciate about this piece - it feels like its offering a new way of experiencing narrative that is visceral, associative (personal & sociological) and unstable.

Woo,

-Jo

rehearsing for "Not I"

Like Erin, I also found difficulty in the practicing of pacing. With the building of my memorization, I found my cadence to be slower and more thoughtful, which contrasts our discussion of the pace from last week. When I picked up my pace, I found I forgot the more fragmented pieces of the monologue that makes "Not I" so unique. I also felt that in my attempts to go faster, I lost any intonation. I would become monotone. I believe that this should not be the case - especially since my segment includes the court scene, which is pretty rich with meaning for the mouth's character. There should be emotion embedded into the monologue, but should not be lost in favor of pace.

As a side note, I also found that I struggled to memorize parts of the piece. Like we discussed last week, there isn't a coherent storyline that can be followed. Parts of my piece jump around or begin some sort of cyclical pattern, only to be lost into more incoherent speech patterns. It's difficult to follow, and even more difficult to conceptualize, and twice as difficult to memorize. However I did find that closing my eyes did improve my memory. Perhaps it's an emphasis on the mind or the mouth?

Rehearsal techniques

As I've been working on memorizing, I've been developing a couple of bad habits. Namely, the way I memorize is by pacing and reading out loud. I hope that means when the time comes to perform, I can stay put and spit my words out. I've also been having trouble with gesticulation; like most people, I tend to move my hands when I talk. In order to work against this, I've tried to clench my hands behind my back while I talk, but, weirdly enough, I've found it harder to remember the words when I do that.

In other rehearsal notes, I've been thinking about what we were talking about last week: about what it means to be fully bodied in the mouth. This has meant a lot of stretching of the jaw, puffing out of the cheeks, blowing out the lips; I've really been trying to explore the space of my mouth, how it shapes and contorts. I've also been doing a lot of tongue twisters, to feel out how my mouth tastes consonants.

We're waiting for Godot.

1) What was French classism and social structure like in the time in which the play was published?  What was the political scene like at the time that could have possibly had an influence on the work itself?

2) Does the juxtaposition of the physical realities of Didi and Gogo (the five senses, i.e. pain) with the seeming lack of metaphysical elements (time, memory, etc.) serve to highlight certain themes within the text? If so, what? Additionally, how have prior productions dealt with this juxtaposition?

3) What are the “rules” of the play? How have prior productions dealt with the “rules” of such elements as the passage of time, character relationships, etc. and how can we incorporate those “rules” or new “rules” into our production?

4) What does this text look like in the original French? Is there a preference for the use of “masculine” words in the original text?

5) Why is this play relevant for our audience? Do we need to find a theme, such as the New Orleans production, to use as a lens to view the play through to continue to make it relevant for audiences? If we do need to find a “theme,” what would it be?

6) Is there any literature that is written on the similarities between the pairing of Didi/Gogo and Hamm/Clov or the similarities between the language used in the interactions between the two sets of characters?  If so, are there over-arching themes between Waiting for Godot and Endgame (or any of Beckett’s other works)?

Godot dramaturgy questions

So sorry these are so late.

Some musings:

-How can we track the decay of these characters' bodies in relation to the play? Going off our questions re: time, it seems to me one of the more reliable markers of time is how the characters interact with their bodies: how Pozzo decays from sighted to sightless, how Estragon registers his wounds.
         -Is such decay "significant" somehow, thematically? Or symbolically? Or should we just take it as "decay?"

-Who are the pugnacious "they" and why do they beat up Estragon/Vladimir?
         -Is this in any way connected to something autobiographical? Beckett's own time sequestered in the countryside? (Probably reading a bit too much into that one)

-What is the landscape of the play? We know that it's a "country road" with "a tree" at "evening." Does anything surround this tree? Is there a soundscape? Are there critters? How far are they from those locations in France Kat/they mention?

-What is the nature of Vladimir and Estragon's relationship? We know they have known each other for a long time. Are they friends? Are they brothers? Are they lovers? Did they transition between these relationship (friends to lovers, brothers to friends, lovers to friends, brothers to lovers (!ack!))?
         -For that matter, what is the exact nature of Pozzo and Lucky's relationship? Is it slave/master, or servant/master? How did this come to be? How does the nature of their relationship affect the world of the play?

-How can we explore the comedy of this play? Is it vaudevillian? Lecoq? None of the above?
         -To what extent can we/should we imbue the play with contemporary stylistic elements? I'm thinking about the Classical Theatre of Harlem production; the NY Times review I read mentioned that the production "owed debts" to rap. Would such contemporary elements overdetermine the setting/Godot somehow?

And, of course, some of the questions we brought up in class last week:
         -Why do this play? How does it relate to us? To our audience? To our theater company? Does it resonate with us philosophically? Aesthetically? Politically? Topically?
                   -What does it mean for this play to be "political?" Does imbuing the play with contemporary politics "overdetermine" Godot? If so, do we mind?
         -Should we/How can we explore the difference between the specificity of Beckett's stage directions (Estragon's boots, musing on the struggle, watching the sun set) and the ambiguity of an audience's perspective?

ESTRAGON: ...Stay With Me!

--> -Tenderness in Godot
[...ESTRAGON wakes with a start. Jumps up, casts about wildly. VLADIMIR runs to him, puts his arms around him.] VLADIMIR: There...there... Didi is there... don't be afraid...
Why does this play appear to have substantially more inter-character tenderness?


How mutually beneficial is the relationship between Pozzo and Lucky?


How do audiences respond to productions of Godot that err on the side of indefinite setting and non-politicization?
How does/does one “read” a production in which Godot is predetermined differently from one in which he/she/it is not?


Who is “Mr. Albert”? (85)
What role does the BOY play in the [determination of the] physics of this world? Is he in a position of dominion? Does the boy age? Why doesn't Godot dye his beard?


Why will he never let him sleep?


What has Pozzo got to prove?


Didi...Afraid...Dreams...Why...?...

VlADIMIR: Suppose we got up to begin with.
ESTRAGON: No harm in trying.
[They get up]
ESTRAGON: Child's play.
VLADIMIR: Simple question of will-power. (78)

Why do these passages jump out at me so?


VLADIMIR: ...it's the way pf doing it that counts, the way of doing it, if you want to go on living. (55)



ESTRAGON: We always find something, eh Didi, to give us the impression we exist?
VLADIMIR: Yes yes, we're magicians. But let us persevere in what we have resolved, before we forget. (64)



VLADIMIR: You must be happy too, deep down, if only you knew it.
ESTRAGON: Happy about what?
VLADIMIR: To be back with me again.
ESTRAGON: Would you say so?
VLADIMIR: Say you are, even if it's not true.
ESTRAGON: What am I to say?
VLADIMIR: Say, I am happy.
ESTRAGON: I am happy.
VLADIMIR: So am I.
ESTRAGON: So am I.
VLADIMIR: We are happy.
ESTRAGON: We are happy. [Silence] What do we do know, now that we are happy?
VLADIMIR: Wait for Godot. (56)



-And particularly this'n:



POZZO: [Suddenly furious] Have you not done tormenting me with your accursed time! It's abominable! When! When! One day, is that not enough for you, one day like any other day, one day he went dumb, one day I went blind, one day we'll go deaf, one day we were born, one day we shall die, the same day, the same second, is that not enough for you? [Calmer] They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams for an instant, then it's night once more. [He jerks the rope.] On!

Cheers,

-Jo

Ponderings

1) Where is the play set? And furthermore, what time period is it set in?

2) I'm interested in what hats signify to Beckett. I have seen them in each of the plays that we have read and they are always there and noted. Is it a sign of masculinity? If we don't know when these plays are set, we cannot just say that it is a result of the time period or common in the area because we do not know where they are set either.

3) I also want to know more about loyalty/slavery. Why does lucky stay with pozzo even when he has opportunities to escape? We see that also in Endgame, why doesn't Clov leave Hamm when he has the ability to and he is unhappy with him? Is it just loyalty? Is it slave mentality? I s it the closest show of love that exists in these worlds?

4) How do the stage directions play a role in Godot? How do they create the absurd and grotesque that we associate with Beckett plays?

5) Forgetting is a common theme in the play and in Beckett in general. I want to know if in Godot it is a result of deterioration, because that is what i think it is. Or is it an issue of aging. This is why I would like to know what the ages of did and gogo are.

6) Where does the inspiration for the names of Beckett's characters come from?

Some Questions

1) How does time progress in this play? Is it linear or circular? Does the play progress from one day to the next or from one season to the next? I know the stage directions indicate that act 2 is "the next day" but how does that explain the "three or four leaves" (usually indicative of a change in season).

2) What is the relationship between act 1 and act 2? Are they, as we briefly mentioned in class, different versions of one another? I think there is a crucial shift that occurs when Pozzo shows up blind. Why reference this difference and what does it want to portray/highlight?

3) What is the purpose of juxtaposing a specific time (for example, the nineties) with the no-man's-land feel of DIDI and GOGO's landscape? Does this specific time serve to highlight the timelessness of the landscape, or does it serve as a ludicrous counterpoint to this strange world? Does it tell us anything about the actual nature of the landscape?

4) How have past productions defined/refused to define Godot? What incarnations or forms has "Godot" taken? We talked briefly about some examples in class but I would be interested to hear more.

5) Why can't any of the characters remember anything? Mike Nichols attributes this loss of memory to some kind of human nature (he talked about how he forgets things all the time), but I think these lapses might indicate something more interesting about the relationship between act 1 and act 2. Can their lapses support the "act 1 and act 2 are versions of each other" hypothesis? ie: they remember different versions of themselves as written by the author?

6) Does Beckett-the-author emerge as an implied character in the text through different re-writings or versions of the same day? If so, what are some ways in which we could represent this figure in our own reproduction?

Godot Questions

1. What time period is the play set in? No time? Every time? Turn of the 20th century?

2. Where are they? The play references regions of France.

3. What is the world of this play? The hierarchical structure, the history. Are there other people populating this world? If there are, what are they like? Are we in a Judaeo-Christian, European world?

4. I would ask the dramaturg to research French clowning methodology.

5. Who is Godot?

6. Where are all the women?

Peter Hall’s Waiting For Godot (1955)

Hey all, 

Since I wasn't in class last week, I'm providing an outline of what my presentation would have been. 

Music by Bartok: 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmkDMTU-hb4 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvdJSVmi404

Pictures of the 1955 production: 

Picture 1 Picture 2

First production in English. Imported from France, directed by Peter Hall at 24. Before Godot, English theater was dominated by drawing-room comedies. The theater’s purpose was to be morally and artistically uplifting to the masses. Scripts were censored by the Lord Chamberlain, except for shows put on by privately owned clubs. London had very little room for small avant-garde theaters due to this censorship.

Peter Hall was the new, young director of the Arts Theatre, with 347 seats and a cramped stage. He cast mostly young, unknown actors. To compensate for the sparse language, Hall provided atmosphere and context with the set, which focused on providing realism. The set included a raised bank with scraggy vegetation upstage, a substantial tree on the bank upstage right that looked like a gnarled oak. Stage left there was “a tar barrel, a rock and some pieces of stone, as if abandoned by road-menders” (Bradby 75). The tar barrel was a focal point for a lot of the action. The set was extensive enough that some critics misinterpreted it as Expressionist. The costumes were elaborate and theatrical. Estragon and Vladimiir wore pinstripe suits that had once been nice, Pozzo wore a checkered suit with a check waistcoat in different check, check overcoat, cravat, monocle and watch chain – a member of the aristocracy. Pozzo, Estragon and Vladimir wore bowler hats. Lucky wore a stovepipe hat and was dressed as a porter. Estragon and Vladimir were portrayed as tramps.

The play was seen as degrading, squalid, pretentious drivel. Critics worried about understanding the play. The audiences and actors were embarrassed by the long unnatural pauses. It nearly closed until Kenneth Tynan, a critic for The Observer, wrote that Godot “forced me to re-examine the rules which had hitherto governed the drama; and having done so, to pronounce them not elastic enough.”

The play’s religious implications were pointed up more in this production, for example, when the Boy is asked where Godot is, he points at the heavens.

Hall added background music by Bartok before the play began and at points in the show to “heighten the sense of strangeness and the feeling of dusk falling on an isolated country road” (75).

Bradby, David. Beckett: Waiting for Godot. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2001. Print.

Questions on Godot

1) What is the temporal context for this play? At one point in the beginning of the play, Didi says, "We should have thought of it a million years ago, in the nineties."

2) Going off of question 1, how can a production reflect this temporal context and space through scenery, music, cues, etc?

3) What can we make of the various and resounding Biblical messages throughout the play? Another way of asking this is: How can we allow our audience, who may not be informed of the Biblical implications, to understand them?

4) I'm increasingly interested in Beckett's stage directions. As Erin pointed out last class, how can we take Beckett's directions in light of all the renditions of this production? In particular, Didi, Gogo, and Pozzo's reactions to Lucky's monologue is detailed and even tracked throughout the course of the speech. What if this doesn't fit into the context of one particular interpretation?

5) In relation to question 5, how can we interpret/manage the physicality of this play? Although the play is historically credited to "not much happening" there seems to be a plethora of physical motion, abuse, and self-expression through movement. (See the stage direction on page 82 - With sudden fury VLADIMIR starts kicking LUCKY, hurling abuse at him as he does so. But he hurts his foot and moves away limping and groaning. LUCKY stirs. Also, this is particularly interesting to think about in terms of Laurel and Hardy's "The Music Box")

6) After all the profound meaning that can be gleaned from this play, why does Beckett choose to end it on Estragon's dropped trousers? What can we make of this?

[7) This question relates to both Godot and "The Music Box." Based my presentation last class that brought up points about bourgeois society and power relations, I'm interested in how both Didi and Gogo - and to this extent Laurel and Hardy - play the roles of the lower classes that are subservient to the bourgeois. Do we find humor in their service or in the ridiculousness in the upper class systems? How do these power relationships color these two productions?]

For Production Histories

Choose one of these landmark productions of GODOT to report on to the group. (Check the COMENTS section below to see if any productions have already been claimed. 

Note: I'm afraid that "landmark" productions may be famous for their oversimplifications of the play's themes. So: while you should certainly report on your production's singular qualities, I'd encourage you to also pay attention to ways that the production deals with the play that any team would need to/want to address.

If you run across a production that isn't listed, but about which you feel passionately, email me and see if it's a good substitute.

There will be some sources for each of these productions online, but the internet is not the only place or way to do research. Reference librarians are your friends.

Susan Sontag (dir.), Sarjevo 1993

Classic Theater of Harlem, 2006--

San Quentin, 1957/Wuppertal Prison, 1954-56

French premiere, dir. Roget Blin (Paris, 1953)

Beckett’s German language production, Berlin,1974-75

American premiere (dir. Alan Schneider) and TV version (dir. Alan Schneider)

Walter Asmus, 1978 BAM (and other productions of WFG directed by him)

Mike Nichols, 1988 LCT

Peter Hall, 1955

New York, 1956

When you have selected the production you want to present on, claim it in the COMMENTS section below, so that there will be no more than one presentation on each production.

A quick response to our last dicussion of physics vs. reality: I am interested in the way that Beckettian landscapes shift and re-shift in an almost hallucinatory way. Throughout these novels names and characters interchange and replace one another almost seamlessly, and the landscape itself transforms joltingly. These transformations depict our narrators' mental landscapes (heightened sanity or insanity?)

On another note I am working with stones for my project. valuable possessions in the Beckettian world include stones, pencils, paper, old hats, and other small possessions. At one point these objects become invaluable, like lovers, but are then discarded in order to make room for another. These objects are then missed and grieved over. I wonder if this sequence references the characters' profound loneliness or whether Beckett is doing more with these seemingly inconsequential objects. Anything has sentimental value when one cares for it long enough. The object becomes curiously tied with the person's history and trajectory.

Just a thought on affirmations and negations (in reference to my last post) in Malone Dies: "But my notes have a curious tendency, as I realize at last, to annihilate all they purport to record" (252).

 I realize this post is quite choppy and all over the place.

Recursion

I reckon there's something to be said for recursion.

Dictionaries say this:

Recursive -
[Computing] relating to or involving a program or routine of which a part requires the application of the whole, so that its explicit interpretation requires in general many successive executions.

I fancy our sensory experience of existence, beyond which there is arguably nothing else (for ever and ever, Amen), gets a wee bit more engrossing and attractive when one has ready access to varying levels of awareness of this experience.  If I were bold I'd say "To exist to exist wholly [holy?] necessitates an intuitive or deliberate perception of an infinite series of perceptive levels beginning [perhaps] at the level of physical phenomena."

Slugs.

A slug, slugs along. 
A [lucky] slug has slug-sex and eats slug-food. 
This slug-sex and slug-food is probably damn good if you're a slug.  [Maybe there's bad slug-sex and food too]. 
There is also the off chance, if you lead a slug-existance that some punk-kid will empty the contents of Papa's table shakers all over your glorious-slimy slug anatomy, sending you into a world of biblical-level suffering. 

The ability to step outside of our immediate experience of pleasant and unpleasant, visceral attraction and aversion to environmental and psychological stimuli adds another layer of cognition to our dealings with the sensuous world.  Claiming the agency to decide [intuitively or intentionally] to sense one's sensing or appreciate one's appreciation of intense attraction, aversion, boredom, pride, elation, etc., I'd say, fosters a depth of perception which, when enjoyed in moderation can be very appealing.  

Once one adds the first layer of recursive appreciation, there logically (whatever that means) is no clear end to the number of layers one might add:

One could feasibly appreciate the appreciation of the appreciation of the appreciation of the appreciation of the appreciation of the appreciation of the appreciation of the appreciation ...
[ad nauseum]. 

Whether this be a logical asymptote with little to no appreciable significance in your daily experience, or the intersection of Earth St. & Nirvana Blvd., the Truth is, its curious as all hell to ponder 'bout. 
I dig it. 

I read [allusions to] something of this [maybe] in Beckett. 

Triumvirate of the Senses

As I'm nearing the end of Malone Dies and about the embark on our third Beckett story, I'm thinking about how the narrative of Malone Dies can alter my performance. In my last version, based solely on Molloy, I attempted to explore the use of senses in the story; Molloy emphasizes a lot of sound and smell in his narrative. This time around, I'm looking into the latter as a part of my performance to accentuate this duality. Additionally, with the inclusion of Malone Dies, I'm bringing in another sense: touch. As Malone says, "My sight and hearing are very bad, on the vast main no light but reflected gleams," I was interested in how Malone explores his other senses to detect his surroundings. He does talk about sound (how cumulatively the sounds of make up a kind of "buzzing"), but I was struck by his relationship to his belongings through the sense of touch. As they seem to anchor Malone to the outside world and preserve part of his humanity, his sensitivity to them, and how they work as a stimuli, is very significant to his character. I'm hoping to include this aspect of the senses in my performance. Finally, after reading The Unnamable, I'm hoping to channel another part of the senses to make up some sort of reigning triumvirate - one that can embody a written narrative through other sensory mediums.

One thing I did want to bring a part from my performance is a passage on page 232 (in my blue-cover version): "Incommoded by the rain pouring into his hat through the crack, Macmann took it off and laid it on his temple, that is to say turned his head and pressed his cheek to the ground.." This whole section I believed really linked itself nicely to Molloy, and really reminded my of Tania's performance. I think the two could be married, or synthesized, through performance really nicely. Thoughts?

Symmetry and Ambiguity in Molloy

Beckett seems to be obsessed with affirmations and negations that directly follow one another. Molloy, for example, lives in a liminal space between opposites. He states a fact or observation only to immediately negate it. The identities of those around him are not fixed, and he makes a point of consistently changing their names throughout the narrative in order to emphasize their shifting nature.

This structure made me have to choose my own reality in the story--the places, the names, etc, but even after having made a choice I found myself flopping back and forth between one reality and another. For instance: Was it raining or not? Was it midnight or not? After thinking that I had made a choice for raining and midnight (since Beckett had already planted these images in my head) I could not comfortably imagine the scene since the negations kept popping up in my head. I found myself in a doubtful state reminiscent of Molloy's confusion.

Two quotes I found particularly interesting: "I always had a mania for symmetry" (79), and "But I would rather not affirm anything on this subject" (59). Molloy's mania for symmetry may partly explain his inability of providing a conclusive fact, since he must also provide an opposite in order to balance the symmetry.

Beckett also plays with the ambiguity surrounding the identity of Molloy--is he Moran at a different time? Did Moran make him up as a symbol of his decaying sanity?