Documentary Performances: Real or Fake
Joe brought up some incredible important facts that Carol Martin presented in her article. For the 3 quotes we were required to bring to class on Wednesday I too chose, "There is no “really real” anywhere in the world of representation. Depending on who you are, what your politics are, and so on, documentary theatre will seem to be ‘getting at the truth’ or ‘telling another set of lies’”(Martin 8). I thought about this for a good while during the discussions we had in class and with our small groups that we are under the impression that these documentary films or performances relate more to a personal perspective of an event, rather than a generalized accusation. Andie brought up, how we watch the news and hear about the statuses or numbers of an event but we do not hear names or stories that have any real information. So how are documentaries any different than watching the news? How do we know who to trust that they are speaking the truth and not just lying to us?
Forming a timeline during an interview is very important. If all the dots connect from the specific dates in history, to the time on the recorder, to the precise moment a person passes by on the street. These all must be related in order to form a truthful story.
Now back to theatre, we are performers trying as much as we can to recreate these moments in time. We study interviews, character descriptions, and observe actions from the person whom we are trying to represent. Performers are under a lot of pressure to make sure their representation is just perfect, because they wouldn't want that person whom they are representing to be misinterpreted or upset for a terrible vision of them.
I worked on the very first stage reading of Spill as an ASM. It was a totally different experience than what I had expected or prepared for. The script was under constant reevaluation and there were multiple rehearsals where we attempted to recreate a scene of importance from the great BP oil spill explosion. However, it was based out of a movement performance so trying to interpret these movements was very important to the director. I remember there was also a night of gallery art where actors were required to go and see their characters who they were representing. After the first opening night, the cast was able to meet these people whom they were representing. It was an emotional time for them because it was a recreation of a scary point in their lives. Scott mentioned in class that he has met the man who he had performed as and that he was most impressed at how they carried out this performance. Being able to hear how well they had performed as a person they were pretending to be was very notable. Spill had been an interesting project because I guess that it was also my first documentary theatre work. I can see how it can be exaggerated and misinterpreted with multiple changes of the script or lengthy explanations from an interview that needs to be cut. All of this work is to achieve interest from the audience.
In Spring 2013 I worked as the ASM on the production Rising Water. This production was another reenactment of a hard time in which people had to suffer and rise against. In this play we meet a couple who is stuck inside an attic during Hurricane Katrina when the waters began to rise and flood the house. Recreating this moment was a pivotal idea for students and people who may have not experienced the aftermath of this vicious storm. These actors had to channel the emotions of how a married couple would respond to being cooped up in a tight space where they had only the few items left to them and the entertainment and hope of each other. This play came about after interviews and is not considered a documentary but shows features as in a timeline and emotional confusion. How do we really know if this couple survived? And how are these actors pretending and achieving the emotions of these characters? This is where the truth is hard to accept because we question, "Is this really what happened during Hurricane Katrina? The audience could form their own opinions from this production whether it is real or not.
Forming a timeline during an interview is very important. If all the dots connect from the specific dates in history, to the time on the recorder, to the precise moment a person passes by on the street. These all must be related in order to form a truthful story.
Now back to theatre, we are performers trying as much as we can to recreate these moments in time. We study interviews, character descriptions, and observe actions from the person whom we are trying to represent. Performers are under a lot of pressure to make sure their representation is just perfect, because they wouldn't want that person whom they are representing to be misinterpreted or upset for a terrible vision of them.
I worked on the very first stage reading of Spill as an ASM. It was a totally different experience than what I had expected or prepared for. The script was under constant reevaluation and there were multiple rehearsals where we attempted to recreate a scene of importance from the great BP oil spill explosion. However, it was based out of a movement performance so trying to interpret these movements was very important to the director. I remember there was also a night of gallery art where actors were required to go and see their characters who they were representing. After the first opening night, the cast was able to meet these people whom they were representing. It was an emotional time for them because it was a recreation of a scary point in their lives. Scott mentioned in class that he has met the man who he had performed as and that he was most impressed at how they carried out this performance. Being able to hear how well they had performed as a person they were pretending to be was very notable. Spill had been an interesting project because I guess that it was also my first documentary theatre work. I can see how it can be exaggerated and misinterpreted with multiple changes of the script or lengthy explanations from an interview that needs to be cut. All of this work is to achieve interest from the audience.
In Spring 2013 I worked as the ASM on the production Rising Water. This production was another reenactment of a hard time in which people had to suffer and rise against. In this play we meet a couple who is stuck inside an attic during Hurricane Katrina when the waters began to rise and flood the house. Recreating this moment was a pivotal idea for students and people who may have not experienced the aftermath of this vicious storm. These actors had to channel the emotions of how a married couple would respond to being cooped up in a tight space where they had only the few items left to them and the entertainment and hope of each other. This play came about after interviews and is not considered a documentary but shows features as in a timeline and emotional confusion. How do we really know if this couple survived? And how are these actors pretending and achieving the emotions of these characters? This is where the truth is hard to accept because we question, "Is this really what happened during Hurricane Katrina? The audience could form their own opinions from this production whether it is real or not.
It seems from your post that there was a really specific truth that Leigh was after in the SPILL workshop; whereas in RISING WATER, the truth of the couple experiencing that event had more freedom for interpretation.
ReplyDelete