Week Two

Dialects first up and we got things started with a game of Samurai (which is different to Ninja) and then our usual Fitzmaurice voice work for half an hour. Today's class was the last lesson for revision of the IPA before the test, so we reviewed the different vowel sounds and some of the consonants and then moved on to other little symbols called diacritics. Basically they're modifiers for the vowel or consonant sounds, which tell you to slightly alter the way you make that particular sound or something else about it. I feel like I've really had a crash course in this theory work, but I think it's enough for it to be useful at least. I think I pick this kind of thing up relatively fast so hopefully I can hold my own during the test - we'll find out on Wednesday. And straight afterwards in Wednesday's class we'll be moving on to learning the Irish dialect. Very exciting.

Svetlana's class today was a real wake up - it was the first time we were presenting our Chekhov scenes to her to be be worked, and people got absolutely torn apart. We only got through three of four of the seven pairings today, and since I'm new my scene will go last, so I spent the class watching and listening intently - trying to pick up on Svetlana's way of working and learn from what the others were doing wrong.
Firstly the actors presenting will hand Svetlana a sheet of paper with their character analysis work. This work revolves around the actor answering five questions which will serve as the base for everything they do in the scene - Who am I? Where am I? What do I want? What do I do to get what I want? What do I do if I don't get what I want? - Sounds easy enough, but the objective (what do I want?) was the first major hurdle for everybody. Svetlana really emphasises that the objective is the most crucial thing to get right, with the wrong objective there is no point going onstage. And, unlike other directors or teachers i've worked with, Svetlana really believes in the right objective - ie there is only one right answer. And that answer can only be found by reading the text over and over and over. This is how it works with Chekhov, he is a writer who gives you everything - you don't have to make anything up, you just have to work hard to find it sometimes ("Don't just make it up, it's in there! You want to make it up? Write your own f***ing play. Chekhov already wrote this one, and it's really good"). With every choice an actor made, or every answer to a question she asked, Svetlana would reply "Where is your proof? In the text, where is the proof of this?" And the more you read the text, the more you get to realise that she's right, the hints and pointers are all there you just have to identify them.
So once we've identified both characters' objectives (which can take a while), then the actors get to put the scene on the floor. But they won't often make it more than a couple of lines in before they're stopped. If she feels that your inner life is not there, or it isn't real, then you stop. If you're acting, you stop. If the choice you make is wrong, or you aren't responding to the other person, or you aren't truly pursuing your objective, you stop. Basically unless it is absolutely right (which it won't be), you stop, try to fix it, and do it again. One thing I find really liberating about this kind of work is that it's very black and white - it's either right or it's wrong, and if it's wrong then you stop and fix it. It's not subjective any more, and in that way you aren't able to settle for mediocre. However, while it's always wrong or right, it's mostly wrong - and Svetlana is very direct in her way of letting you know that. Especially if you get the same thing wrong more than once. It made me a little bit uncomfortable when she singled me out for answering questions correctly about other people's scenes that she asked us when they couldn't find the answers themselves, about objectives etc, and basically said to the class "Why is it that boy from New Zealand can get all the answers and students who I already teach for one year don't know anything?" Awkward. Just before she said this she asked me not to answer any more questions because the others needed to work harder.
She did get pretty angry with most of the class by the end of the lesson, not because they were getting it wrong, she said, but because they had gone backwards - their technical skills from a year ago were "all gone" and she was wasting her time teaching them all again. I suspect that when I do my scene, probably on Wednesday, that she'll go a little bit easier on me simply because she hasn't taught me before and so everything I get told or directed to do I will genuinely be hearing for the first time. I think that's good, but I don't want to be let off the hook at all so my partner and I are going to rehearse again tomorrow so we're as ready as we can be and I'm going to invest more time between now and then just reading and reading and reading my scene.

It was nice to end the day with our camera skills class, where my half of the class spent a couple of hours filming one group's scene (a scene from He's Just Not That Into You). I was on camera operation, which was good fun, and I learnt a lot about the camera itself and framing shots and composition etc. It also helps that they are really well set up for this kind of thing at CSUF - they've got a purpose bilt studio with all kinds of set, lighting, props etc all on hand, not to mention great camera, lighting and sound rigs. Basically just really top notch equipment and facilities, which made it reasonably easy. Also, the teacher, John, is from the opposite school of education to Svetlana. He's very laid back and softly-spoken, and is more of an encourager and nudger than anything else. He also has a wealth of TV and film experience, as I found out when I put his name into IMDB, which I guess helps too.

Phew. That'll do for today. Off to do more work.