Performance at Farnham Castle.

Stephanie Atha

Performance at Farnham Castle

We chose Farnham Castle because it provided us with an historical site and a wealth of information. Its an attractive site with the community and the performance space is unusual offering us an alternative area to explore different styles of theatre for example; Walkabout journey and procession.

We wanted to devise an historical drama based on characters who lived at the castle and use the unusual architecture to our advantage. Our intention was to provide our audience with historical facts but also entertain them.

There are areas that provide hidden spaces from the audience such as the well and the ruined turrets. The high wall provides enough space for costume changes or to hide the cast from the audience. The imposing steps leading up to the keep would create a creative and ideal route for the narrator to lead the audience up to the keep.

The different shapes, levels and textures at the keep would give a perfect atmosphere to create scenes by improvising using the genre of physical theatre.

The open space in the keep gave the feeling of being exposed to the elements.

These elements did inspire the devising process. The large space also gave the opportunity for a large audience to get involved.

The space did have its down points however. It didn’t have access for disabled audience members. There were obviously health and safety issues for the cast and the audience. Because of the stairs up to the keep we found it hard to get scenery to the keep. This problem however could be rectified by using symbolic props and nearly bare stage using Epic Theatre forms. However the space didn’t limit our choice of theatre styles because many different spaces could be created.

If when we perform it rains the audiences enjoyment would be affected and costumes would get ruined. On a windy day our voices would be harder to understand for the audience because of the wind. Mime could be incorporated into each scene as a universal language in this case.

This shows the performance space that we were working with. I think that we have endless choices of theatre styles that we can use in this space. The use of epic theatre would only help to communicate the intended message of the scene.

Research was critical for our piece because it helped us to understand about the keep and its purpose. Because our piece is site specific we needed to know the history of the castle to devise our piece. There were three main areas that we researched these were historical facts, theatre styles and their forms/practitioners.

When we researched the history of the castle we learned of many historically famous people who had lived there. This was our stimulus for our piece as we decided that the contents of each scene would be about different people who lived at the castle.

We all researched different theatre styles so that we could discuss all the different options in class. The space at the key is amazing so to use it to the full using the technique journey would allow this. There are three different categories which we explored to find the best for our performance. The first one in which the whole audience follows the actors, who travel through a series of different scenes, much like a static play in a range of locations. The second tactic is where the audience moves to watch scenes in places without necessarily being led. The third possibility is the ‘magical mystery tour’ in which audience groups of limited numbers are guided by the actors through a series of staged advents. We chose that the first option suited our performance best.

We watched Lea Anderson’s piece ‘Flesh and Blood’ which influenced us to create gestures for the plague scene in the form of a dance. We are constantly using Brecht’s technique of doing everything in front of the audience and not hiding it for example moving from one scene to another just simply walking in front of the audience.

All my research was from the internet because I find the internet easy and quick to use however after I learned the facts I went on to further my research in the local library. There are different styles of outdoor performance however not all of them could be used in the space we chose to use. ‘Outside the theatre building’ is one but we couldn’t relate this to the space of the key as its supposed to be directly outside a theatre. ‘Site specific’ which is a performance specific to the site that it is performed at, this is the technique that we used because we wanted to entertain and educate our audience.

It is crucial that we continue to further our research so that we can develop the characters so that the performance is realistic.

Our piece is episodic due to the historical narrative and time frame. Because of our research a wide variety of forms were used in each of the five scenes, and there were obvious influences from the practitioners we have studied. The research we did helped us to understand what content would work best in our piece.

The influence of the practitioner Lea Anderson appeared in two scenes of our performance. These two scenes were the Morley ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

It is crucial that we continue to further our research so that we can develop the characters so that the performance is realistic.

The influence of the practitioner Lea Anderson appeared in two scenes of our performance. These two scenes were the Morley scene and the Plague scene. Her key influence was actions that represented feelings and emotions. For example looking up in the Morley scene meant looking to God. Techniques of Brecht’s were used in all of our scenes. As we have been studying Brecht’s work for over a year he has become more of an influence on the whole class. This meant that numerous techniques of his are used throughout the performance.

The influence of the practitioner Tavener can be seen in the Morley scene, we used chant/chorus to create the atmosphere that we wanted.

We used the technique of victimisation from Bruce in the plague scene and the Execution of Charles the 1st. This was to create a sympathy feeling from the audience.

Each scene was constructed in a different way using different ideas.

Scene one

Our intention for scene one was to portray Morley’s life and his decent into madness.

We were influenced by the choreographer Lea Anderson and created some initial movements that represented religion. Palms together represented praying, arms crossed represented a cross, eyes up represented God, arms bent over head represented an arch and arms curved up represented enlightenment. The features we used included two-dimensional contact work and religious gestures. All this work put together developed into a succession of physical images portraying religious imagery.

We used elements of epic theatre incorporating the verfremdumeffekt, minimalism and direct address. From this Bishop Morley’s actor stepped out of scene and approached the audience.

We wanted the opening of this scene to be strong and create an eerie and religious atmosphere. This was created by a chant lead by the character of Bishop Morley. It was impossible as a group not to create a rhythm however through lots of practice we developed a final sound that created the effect we wanted. To finalise this scene we created a monologue for Bishop Morley, which was surrounded by key words being uttered. We improvised key positions and various tableaux around him as the monologue is performed.

This scene was overall created by our improvisation tasks, which we had practiced on our first visit to the keep.

Scene two

For this scene we had planned to educate the audience on Henry the VIII’s character and his relationships he had with his six wives, Also we wanted the audience to know how his marriages had ended either divorced, beheaded, died or survived. We used Brechtian techniques to communicate this to the audience such as frozen tableaux, song, placards, and direct address. We also created a short monologue for the actor playing Henry the VIII coming out of character and addressing the audience instructing them to ‘Bow down before the King’ this was manipulation of the audience which is a technique of theatre of cruelty.

We decided that after the Morley scene we wanted to allow light relief, so the commercial aspects of this scene worked well with the song theme. We chose the song ‘Senorita’ by Justin Timberlake and replaced the lyrics with some comical lyrics of our own which related to the relationship that Henry the VIII had with his wives. Throughout the song we used movements that had been inspired to us by Lea Anderson in her work ‘Flesh and Blood’, in particular we used two-dimensional contact work in profile facing the audience. We also used the Brechtian technique of using placards that the six wives had attached around their necks to show their name on one side and the way in which their marriage ended on the other.

Scene three

Our intention for scene three was to portray an entertaining and fun insight into Mary Tudor’s wedding night allowing our audience to understand her fears and worries about marrying Prince Phillip of Spain. This scene required a lot of research so that we could find out what Mary was like and show them emotions enabling our audience to be educated.

We improvised various rhythmic sections of verse to form the narrative. We used two devices from epic theatre. One was song the other gestus.

To conclude this scene we started and ended the scene using another epic form. This was frozen tableaux. In this case the frozen tableaux were of the two maids grooming Mary. Although this scene was improvised rehearsal was critical because throughout the scene the three actors talked in verse. Therefore timing was an issue and required extra care.

Scene four

In this scene we wanted to express the emotions of the plague victims to the audience. We used various forms and devices from different practitioners these were: Lea Anderson, Christopher Bruce and Brecht.

After studying Lea Anderson’s ‘Flesh and Blood’ we decided that her technique of gestures to communicate was a good way of communicating the plague victims emotions in this scene. These are our original gestures that we put together in various orders:

Spread fingers and thumb out of mouth = cough
Fingers walking up arm = rats
Fingers walking over chest = fleas
Arms crossed/fists clenched = cross
Arms crossed over chest = death
Arms stretched out in profile to audience = despair

We also used the device of using two-dimensional work in profile and facing the audience. We included head rolls allowing a leader and subservient role and the laid to rest motif also used in ‘Flesh and Blood’.

Scene Five

Scene five begins with an execution speech by Charles 1st making use of a monologue and a word-scape to reiterate the speech and the more important elements of it. We wanted to make this scene as realistic as possible so for the rest of our cast who were not in this scene became part of the crowd and shouted to encourage the execution (in research we discovered that this is how towns people would of reacted). Whilst we used one actor to portray Charles 1st, the group were moving through a succession of frozen tableaux also performing the word-scape simultaneously. These tableaux included influences from Lea Anderson such as floor work, laid to rest, two-dimensional work and eye gestures. These devises added to abstract and contemporary feel of the scene.

Other techniques we used were from the practitioner Brecht. We were in symbolic costume allowing the actor playing Charles 1st to have a moustache and the executioners to wear black hoods.

We used a variety of forms and devices from the practitioners we had studied. We wanted to perform our historical narrative in a contemporary way so it was important to explore their features and include them as follows:

It wasn’t that important to have symbolic costume and props in our piece because our performance was based on the history of the keep. We all decided to wear black, however extra props would to be added for the clarity of characters. For example Henry the 8th and his six wives wear big placards with their names on and weather they died, survived, got beheaded or divorced on the other side of the placard. This was done for the sake of the audience so that they learned the history of the wives.

The use of placards is a Brechtian form so that the audience can learn.

The relationship between the narrator and the audience was critical, the more the audience trusted the narrator the more they followed the narrators directions. Because our performance is a journey this was critical so that the audience followed the correct route.

As the chant was the first thing that the audience saw it was important that it set the mood for the performance, and that it set the standard for the rest of the performance. As this section of the performance was highly religious we wanted to reinforce the mood. Because of the wind at the Keep we needed to be loud and pitch correctly to get the clear loud harmonies. The music which then followed our chant was also a chant like song by a choir which helped to create the atmosphere and also build up for the drama of the character Bishop Morley acted by Tom. This music made the atmosphere and created tension.

The techniques used in the Morley scene were influenced from the practitioners Lea Anderson and Bertole Brecht, the Morley scene is similar to the Plague scene which also had the same influences. The actions taken in the Morley scene were influenced by Lea Andersons ‘Flesh and Blood’. We used a lot of her ideas and motifs as ‘Flesh and Blood’ is set in a church and our piece was religious so the motifs suited our piece which we developed for a final piece. This is mixed with the influences of Brecht with the word uttering and key words.

In the plague scene the music behind the Anderson influenced actions was perfect. It set the sadness of the scene and the emotion. This really built up the sadness and the reality of how bad the situation was. The music was so important at this point of the performance as it set the audiences emotions wild.

The rehearsal was different to how we had imagined it would be. The main problem that we had to battle was with the wind. Because of the high levels of wind at the top of the Keep our voices were lost. This was when we realised that everything was going to have to be a lot bigger if we wanted to have a successful performance. Also we struggled with our hair blowing all across our faces, This meant that eye gestures were lost and characters weren’t as clear. However this was a problem that we knew we could solve. In the Henry the 8th scene the placards kept turning the wrong way round which showed the outcome of the wives too early. This destroyed the scene and ruined the surprises to come. The timing generally in all the scenes was poor because the space was so much bigger and more open than to what we were more used to. Another problem that we had because of the larger space was that we could not hear each other in the chant and struggled to keep in tune and in time with each other.

There were positive elements that came from our rehearsal, the costume worked well and suited the scenery and feeling of the Keep. Also the various spaces that were available for each scene with the ruined turrets that provided ‘backstage’ area which were useful for quick changes and props. The music worked well in the scene and created the atmosphere that we had hoped for, this also gave us the chance to see what level the music needed to be at.

Rehearsing in the performance space was invaluable allowing us to return to our original space and refine our piece. We particularly concentrated on the chant and discussed how to use our voices more to our advantage. It was useful to rehearse when the wind was fierce, enabling us to realise how this original performance issue could ruin our performance. This was an element of the performance process, therefore was very important.

Our main intention for the piece was to entertain and educate our audience. We performed our final piece at Farnham Keep because our piece had been based on the historical background of Farnham Keep due to it being site specific. We performed our piece on Friday the 24th of October at 11:00am. We chose this time because of convenience time in our lesson also because of the forecast for that day. Our performance was performed for visitors at the Keep, this was so that visitors could learn about the Keep and also to be entertained.

The performance was different to the rehearsals because it was enjoyable seeing the audiences reactions. Also it was not so pressurised because the piece was finished and rehearsed. Having the audience there also meant that the whole cast took the performance seriously whereas in rehearsals there is no pressure to get it right so mistakes often occurred. The piece was shorter than in rehearsal, this was because we couldn’t stop to correct mistakes like we had in rehearsal. The only mistake of our performance was that one of the verses in the Henry the VIII scene was repeated, however this was not noticeable from the audiences point of view.

The journey that we have travelled as a group from research to the final performance has been of great importance. We started with only research about the Keep which we devised to create short motifs. We then developed these motifs by improvising to extend. Then this was rehearsed to improve, this then led to our final performance.

Some of our performance we left down to improvisation. For example the narrators role was improvised at places in the performance so that the narration suited the audience on the day. The heckling was also left to improvisation, this was because it wouldn’t sound realistic if heckling was choreographed as such.

The audience doesn’t always respond how you expect them to, this was proved in our performance. This is something that I will remember for future devising.

When the narrator moved the audience from one scene to another the audience ended up in most scenes at the wrong place. This was because we never rehearsed with an audience, we should of thought about this and got another class to watch in the rehearsal so that the narrator could practice getting the audience at the correct place. I felt that audience wasn’t always focussed on the performance because they were watching others getting ready for different scenes, this couldn’t be helped however, this could only be improved by actors being hidden from site which can not be achieved at the Keep.

When Chris ordered the audience to ‘Bow down their heads’ the audience didn’t, this also could have been achieved by an audience in rehearsal.

The audience responded to the singing in this scene and clapped along, this was because members of our cast who were not in this scene stood in the audience and clapped along to encourage the audience.

The audience didn’t react to the theatre of cruelty technique that we used in the Plague scene. The reaction that we wanted was for the audience to start itching when the actors did, although we didn’t get this response the audience did feel awkward and started to step backwards.

In the Charles the 1st scene when actors were heckling the audience looked intimidated we had hoped that possibly the audience would join in and heckle Charlotte.

I feel that this could have been improved if we had an audience in our dress rehearsal, because then we could of developed our piece through the different process areas.

Although our performance didn’t go to plan in some areas we have achieved what we had wanted to achieve, this was ‘ to educate and entertain our audience’. This was defiantly achieved because we devised a piece that was factual and educated, also from asking members of the audience about the performance I was informed of the enjoyment of the performance.

All of this was achieved through research and the devising process.

The idea of a journey I felt made the performance more informative and also made the audience feel involved.

The performance was a successful piece of theatre, although it had its faults it achieved our aim and was enjoyable to watch.

Our hard work resulted in an entertaining and educating performance.