(Final Dress Run Through) Rehearsal, Closet, Summer Play Festival, 2005.07.20

What's working and what's not:

1) Scene one, J and M: OK

2) Scene two, L and M: OK

3 Scene three, the transition from this scene two to this scene, when M thinks he's caught, is rough, i.e., it's just "not there" and I'm not sure why. Also, the climax of the scene -- the director and I aren't quite on the same page, but her choices and take have led me to something "climatic" that I think will work. M is literally telling L that they have to make a serious change in their relationship. I'm not sure if M really believes this and is just saying this to win L back or if he's sincere. If he was insincere, that would normally be a setup to a "punch line" later in the play, but there's no reason in the text to believe that he isn't sincere. It's clear it's a triumph for M to win L back at this point, and that's a setup for the final scene (#4) and all it's confusions. What motivates M is that everything is at stake in losing/winning L back (though he never says or alludes to this). This is a tough moment for me because I'm still slipping around on what's going on, but the "shape" of what I want is definitely there:

when M says "you think that's what this means to me?" This is insight. A light goes off about what's really at stake here, what he really wants, and he needs to convince/urge L that they need to change course, right now. It's implied that if they don't, they'll lose everything, and I've got to have a very clear idea of what that "everything" is to make this moment believable.

And you know . . . it's just occurred to me that this is exactly what's missing in the transition from scene two to scene three. Ted Zurkowski (a great acting teacher [and a great guy] at Lee Strasberg) once gave me some great theatrical advice:

end with the beginning: if you're confused at the end, look back at the beginning -- the answer is usually there.

What's missing in the transition, when M thinks he's caught, is where he ends up, winning L back. Silly -- I don't know why I didn't see this before. Ok -- now I've got something to try, but now in performance rather than rehearsal.

Another interesting problem: really listening and responding seems to be significantly impacting how I'm pursuing my objectives. It seems lately in rehearsal that the "how" has been changing sometimes, and then I get a line reading from the director, the rational for the line reading isn't clear (I'm just trusting the director) but then I get confused about what I'm suppose to be doing up there. I'm trying to do things the way the director wants them done, but I'm starting to feel like I should be going with the moment more, letting that over-ride a specific line reading. Damn ... I need more experience, I think, to know what's best to do.

NOTES FOR NEXT TIME (the next production):

I realize now that what I should have been doing in rehearsal, right off the bat, is prioritizing really, Really, REALLY looking and listening and taking in the other actor and reacting that. At the same time, I should be slowly learning how to integrating "objectives" and actions into an ongoing connection with the other actor. I never really feel like "acting" -- I really just want to re-act, but using the objectives of the character as a constraint, i.e., being clear what I want (not easy), connecting with that (ever harder), AND staying connected with the other actor (which really makes things so much easier, at least it seems that way).