Download The Importance of Reflection and Collaboration in Theatre Directing by Dr. Michael Mauldin and more Study notes Theatre in PDF only on Docsity!
I’m Bob Bradley. This is THE 101, Introduction to Theater and Drama Arts. My guest today is Dr. Michael Mauldin who has come to the theater — who has come to this occupation of directing after a long and successful career as an actor in both the professional and academic world. And so we are very happy today to have him talk about his function as a director. Welcome. M: Thank you, Bob. B: I suppose we start with — okay. The director at least reads the script and makes the decision — I’ve seen some productions when I wonder. But you’ve read the script and at that point you say, “Yes, I want to direct this.” All right. Now, how then now do you start — maybe the word is preparing and reading this script from a directorial standpoint? What do you do? M: Of course I think it depends on the production, it depends on the script. Because I think that there are various — different approaches, I think, work for different scripts. Or at least that’s what’s happened to me in my progress, hopefully progress as a director. That you don’t treat every text the same way. If there is some uniformity, though, I think probably the first step that I take now — which is very different from when I started as a younger man — is that I spend some time just with the script, just me and the script, sometimes over a period of weeks, you know, depending on how long you have. You can’t really say that there is a method or an approach — or at least I’ve discovered there is not a way of doing it that will work for every text. If there is a constant now, however, I think what I tend to do is to try and spend as
much time as I can before the rehearsals begin, even before I have any meetings with designers or technical people or any of the other creative staff involved in the production, reading and rereading and most especially reflecting on the text when not engaged in it. I think it’s very, very important — and I think this is a luxury we don’t give ourselves very often because we’re so conscious of that clock ticking all the time, that we have to hurry up and get it done — is the real value of sort of pushing away from the text and just letting things simmer and stew for awhile. You know how it is when you have something in mind or you’re working on a project and suddenly you start seeing all these references all over the place to it — you know, in the news or, you know, a street sign and you think, “Oh, this must be a sign about this project.” But, you know, obviously it’s just because your thoughts are centered there. But the first thing, I think, that I will do these days is I try to figure out what — what is it that compelled this playwright to create this play, other than the story. Basically, I guess the simple answer is what does this play mean other than what the plot is about? B: Okay. When you say what the play means, at this point are you talking strictly in terms of what you find in the script or are you now going to outside sources? M: Probably at the very beginning it’s just what’s in the script. And that’s an awfully good — that’s a good observation to make, Bob. It really is. Because there are — you know, the order of it — again, I don’t think that there is a set way of doing it. But for me what seems to work is that first of all it’s the relationship I find with the
important to do this production. Because up until then, I had always as a director — and really this is the way I was trained as a director, that you always start out with a very — with a vision or a concept in your mind. Sometimes you even bring in sketches or, you know, books and say this is — you know, these are the colors, these are the palettes that I’m talking about. I need five doors, I need the stairway, things like that. Ball says that will take care of itself. That really is — it’s like blocking and blocking is just moving actors around on the stage. That generally takes care of itself, you know, if you’re trained in it. The important thing is to get this consensus about what is the heart of this play. Why is it important? Why is it a mission that we are involved in it in this admittedly difficult process? And often seemingly impossible process of mounting a production in four to six to eight weeks. And the latter would be a luxury these days. So his advice — and I have found it to be very, very solid advice and it’s one that I have followed ever since reading that book. B: But I think — and you said a very important thing. Not only why is this play important, but then — and then you sort of not reduced it, but at that point -- but why to this audience, why to this locale? Because what may be important and may be understandable to people, let’s say, in New York and Broadway theater is not necessarily going to be the same thing in Springfield, Missouri. M: Absolutely.
B: And it doesn’t mean that that’s a denigration of Springfield, Missouri, at all. M: Not at all. And because the inverse is true as well. And I’ve seen this happen a great deal. Very often plays that will come out of regional theater which are about, you know, a particular topic like, oh, “The Kentucky Cycle,” a very well-written play, beautifully produced. But when it went to New York, it failed miserably. Which again is nothing against the play. That play or the story of that play, the characters of that play, and the concerns of that play seems to be so far removed from the urban experience that they simply — it simply didn’t speak to them. And I think it’s a very important undertaking for not only the director and the stage manager and assistant director if you have one, but also all the designers and I would also include the actors in these discussions. And I know a lot of my director colleagues will disagree with a lot of my approaches to directing and that’s fine. Hopefully, we’re all different on it so the audience can be exposed to these different approaches to what we call theater. But I think that it’s even important to get actors once they are involved in the production after casting — their take on what is the purpose of doing this play at this time for the people of Springfield, Missouri, if it was going to be done here. What specifically might we be able to say if anything. Because I think the problem is if you can’t answer that, then it seems to me you have a real problem with the play. B: Okay. Back up slightly. How do you discover or how do you decide what a play says or means? How did you arrive at that? Reading it, obviously, but
characters represent, then that starts making everyone think of the piece as a whole including — and I think this is very important — the actors. Because I think actors tend to think of themselves — think of their work on the character as being very isolated, you know. I think that’s a lot of our actor training is we make it a very lonely — you know, what can I bring to this and how can I make this character distinct, and all of that. I think one of the things they rarely think about is how do I fit in to the greater scheme of the machinery of this play? Why, in fact, was I written into this play. What do I represent? What argument do I represent? And that’s what I think really starts making everyone involved in a production think of not only the piece as more important and vital but also their own contribution to it as more important and vital. And again, if you don’t have that, I don’t know why you do it. If you don’t have that sense that — I would say the moment that anyone involved, director included, starts thinking in terms of, “Oh, well, I’ve gotta knock this one off,” get out of it. Stop doing what you’re doing. You’re too tired or something has happened, and that production is not going to be the kind of production that is going to make an audience sit up and listen and watch what you’re doing with any sort of sense of vitality or engagement. So that, I think, is really the first method that I take these days. Now, that differs from the way I began as a director as a young man. Because again, usually I would come in with everything prepared and everything worked out, basically saying, “This is how the production is going to look, this is what it’s going to sound
like, and this is also what it means. So your job — designers, actors, everyone involved — your job is to reflect my interpretation or facilitate my interpretation of the text.” To me — and I know that’s a perfectly valid way o f approaching directing. It just doesn’t happen to excite me anymore. Because then I find it to be localized in one interpretation. And generally if you have people who are willing to do that with you, generally they’re always looking for you to approve or disapprove of what their idea is. And I find it to be very — I find it to be very stultifying for people’s creativity, you know. I love being surprised by what an actor or designer might bring to the rehearsal. Because there’s always that possibility they’re going to do something or say something or create something that you didn’t know that this is what this play was about. When, in fact, for me that’s what the rehearsal process has become in an ideal situation. It’s a process of discovery, not a p rocess of repetition. To bring it up to an interpretation which I have already worked out in my mind. B: So the discovery becomes a journey both for you and everyone working on the production in some way? M: Absolutely. B: How do you encourage them to enter into this process? M: That’s difficult, isn’t it? It really is. Especially, I think, the way that actors in particular are trained these days, which I have found to be very — oh, what’s the word? They are receivers of interpretation rather than givers of interpretation. Passive, I guess, is the word I’m looking for. They’re passive. They find — they
talking about. Because there is no creation involved in that. There is no interpretation. There’s no personal involvement with either the director, the actor, or the designers. And so far I’ve been very pleased with this approach as an artist. I can’t say that it’s always successful with audiences and I can’t say that I always care. Because it’s one of those things that you have to question, “Now, why are we doing what we’re doing?” But so far, generally I think audiences have been responding pretty well to it. B: So you bring everyone in as — or at least you hope you bring them in as sort of co-creators together. How do you get them to begin working and thinking — what do you do, then, to -- M: I will generally start with a series of exercises and games. And I know at first they can seem somewha t random, but they are all generally very carefully planned to not only get the cast engaged in working with itself and sort of breaking down — breaking the ice of it. I mean, that’s a big part of it, is just breaking the ice. I mean, that’s the great luxury that we often don’t have in this country, is working with a company of actors who have a history with each other. And so you don’t need to go through that, you know, sometimes week long process of actors being able to — to trust each other so that the y can make choices which are out of the ordinary and surprising and daring in the same way that they need to be able to trust the director. That the director is not going to go, “No, that’s wrong.” Now, unfortunately — in my mind, unfortunately a lot of d irectors do that a lot. You
know, “That’s not the interpretation” or “That’s not the way I want you to do it.” Which again I think just makes a very passive, cowardly actor. But I think it’s a — it’s a combination of these sort of exercises which are no t only geared to get the cast engaged and trusting each other, but they’re also somehow connected with the text. Even if the cast may not realize it at first. That all of these games and exercises and improvisations do have a message to them on how they build. B: You have made this prior to the rehearsal? M: Yes. B: You have devised these games, these exercises, and you deliberately said, “Okay. This exercise is tied to something in the text that you --” M: I won’t always say that at the beginning, you know. B: Right. I mean that you in your own mind — you may not say it aloud. M: Exactly. Exactly. But I will make certain choices also with the idea that sometimes it’s not going to work, you know. You may try an exercise or a game or something and it is simply not working, and that’s when you move on to something else. Either you haven’t been clear or they are simply not — it doesn’t engage their interest. And I think that’s where a director — I think that is o ne of the most important things a director can do throughout the entire rehearsal process is keep everyone,, particularly the cast, engaged and it’s one of the hardest things to do. Because, you know, as a director you become so distracted, particularly as the production gets nearer to opening. You know, you’re worried about the set and the lights and
know. Taking some sort of intangible thought or theme or something like that and then having them tangibly create it. Somehow that starts getting the ideas of the text physically into their bodies. Then the next step generally — and again, you know, this will vary. B: What you’re doing here is asking them for a visual manifestation of something which is an abstract idea? M: Exactly. Which really seems to make them — because, one, it means that they have to grapple with that idea. They have to understand just what does that idea mean in order for them to physically demonstrate. B: And this doesn’t have to be rooted in reality or realism? M: Oh, absolutely not. B: But somehow it is a physical manifestation of what it is? M: Yes. Which is a much different process than having them talk about it or write about it. And there is great value to those other things as well, but I’m saying this seems to be a very different kind of creative process that happens when one has to put their mind around what this abstraction means in order to make something tangible. Now, the benefit, the practical benefit, of doing something like that, from a directorial standpoint, is that they may in fact be creating things which you as the director are looking six weeks down the road and going, “Ohhh, that’s a good picture” or “I would never have thought of that moment” or “That’s something that I can use.” That’s a very interesting composition that I can put on-stage that these
actors have created for you. So, I mean, it has benefits on several levels. Probably the most beneficial, I think, for the cast is that sense of, again, ownership and possession of the text. Because the next thing that I will generally do is then start working in the text. Now, remember this is before what I sometimes call official rehearsals begin. This is before we go into blocking and, you know, character development. This is fundamental precursors to that kind of work. The next step I’ll generally use — and usually I will do this — well, almost all the time I will do this with classical texts or texts which are very language based -- which again young American actors tend to have a problem with sometimes because that’s generally not a big part of their training — is to physicalize the text, is to take bits and pieces or — one of the most beneficial exercises and this I took from Tina Packer, a wonderful director who’s the artistic director of Shakespeare and Company. She uses this a lot, this idea of shadowing. That if you have a person playing a role — and this is before lines are memorized — that they will go through and they’ll be improvising, you know, the scenes or blocking, and it’s very important, I think, to always say that this is not about performance. What you’re not doing is necessarily related at all to what the eventual product is going to be. This is a series of explorations. But then you have a person, usually another actor, shadowing them with the text and they’re basically feeding them the lines, line by line or thought by thought. So that that completely releases that actor from any responsibility of performance or
another thing — although I did do this to some extent with something like “Showboat,” you know, where you have this enormous technical — you know, you have a boat coming on-stage and things like that. You have enormous extra actor factors on-stage which you as the director also have to be aware of, you know. You’re much more aware of things like ground plants and how many steps must be taken and what’s flying in at the time, and all of that. But it — I mean, now that I think of it, I did do a number of these kinds of early — experimental works early in the rehearsal process which again, I think, facilitated the performers coming up with ideas which surprised me as a director. Which I didn’t know were in the text. Again, from a very practical standpoint, it also keeps the director engaged and we don’t talk about that much, is how easy it is for a director to become bored with the process. Again, if everything is worked out, then a lot of times the director’s work is done and he or she becomes a traffic copy, you know, and that’s really their job. B: Before we get to the director and the traffic cop, let’s back up — way back. What kind of research do you do — and obviously it’s gonna depend on each individual script. But what kind of research do you do and how much do you do? What kind of work do you do along those lines which then is removed from the actual text? M: Yes. That’s a very good and very contentious question because there’s certainly a school of thought — and a very valid school of thought — that everything you need to know about the production is in the script and that that’s the only thing that you
refer to. And that’s fine. I happen to be of the other school. I do a tremendous amount of research on a production. And again, depending, as you said, on the kind of text that it is, when it takes place, when it was written — you know, you have all these opportunities. I will generally — I don’t know how many categories I’m gonna break this down into, so I’ll just sort of free-think for awhile here. But first of all, I will generally research in no particular order of importance critical commentary about the play itself, what other people have said about the text and what other people have said about the productions of the text. I have found this to be very useful. On one level, you know, there may be, you know, an 18th^ century critic that serves as nothing more than a curiosity. That you can go, “Oh, isn’t that interesting that they thought that about this play back then. Isn’t that — I wouldn’t have thought of that.” You know, it doesn’t mean that anymore, but isn’t it interesting that that’s what that audience got out of it. On the other hand, you know, you can read a critic and you can go, “Oh, I never thought of that. I never thought that that’s what this play could be about or that’s what this character could be about.” So I have found that to be absolutely imperative in the same way that — and I guess this would be the same category — say if I’m doing a Shakespeare piece or something, I will also try to find what actors have said about playing these roles. And I’ve found that to be an unexpected treasure trove of information of — you know, Gielgud preparing for Prothbro in his many productions of “The Tempest,” or something like that, and just how he has
Shakespeare is writing about — if he’s writing about Julius Caesar in Rome or, you know, if he’s doing “Measure for Measure” and it’s in Italy — he’s always writing about Elizabethan London. No matter where his plays are set, he’s always writing about London. And I think that’s interesting information. B: And I have seen a production of Julius Caesar which was costumed in Elizabethan costumes. M: As most likely it would have been done in his time. So that’s the kind of research that is really interesting. How might this play originally — exactly. None of this sort of very, again, contemporary preoccupation we have with accuracy on-stage. But to contextualize — well, for example, let’s take Julius Caesar. So probably what I would do is I would say, “All right. I’m going to look at Shakespeare’s period in Elizabethan England, see what’s going on, and then also I have to look at the period in which Julius Caesar is set, you know.” That Roman period -- B 44 B.C. M: Exactly. And see what is going on there to get this understanding. After that’s done, then, of course the director always has the choice — sometimes rightly and sometimes maddingly — to say, as Orson Welles did to do his — was it Macbeth or Caesar that he put in Nazi Germany as part of the Mercury Theater? I think it was Caesar -- B: That’s Caesar. M: It was Caesar, wasn’t it? That’s right. Voodoo Macbeth, yeah. Well, you know, he does his Caesar and basically staged it taking place in, you know, mid-’40s Nazi
Germany. So then you have that sort of added research about the period that you might set it in. And again, I think what you’re always looking for are resonances, you know. What is the combination of Shakespeare, Rome, and the Third Reich? What are those resonances that are being made by combining, implicitly or explicitly, those three areas of research? It’s like when someone wants to do Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible.” I mean, certainly you would say, “Okay. I’m going to certainly research the Salem Witch trials. But you’ve also got to be able to research the context of the Red scare in the 1950s that is compelling Miller to write this piece and set it rather ingeniously during the Salem Witch trials. So, yeah, research is a major component. B: Okay. Let me throw out a term — and at this point I won’t do anything other than say you frequently hear people refer to the playwright’s intention. What do you do with the playwright’s intention? M: I find that very problematic. I truly do. And I was influenced by a professor of mine about this who really opened my eyes — or I think opened my eyes about it — is the — I think what he calls the arrogance of saying that you understand or you have the key to the playwright’s intentions when often playwrights can’t even tell you what their intentions are. If I may, I’ll give you an example from my history as — when I was an actor in New York and I was friends with a very good and rather well-known playwright who’s no longer living. But I was often involved in sort of initial productions or sometimes
