Instead...some thoughts on Richard Foreman and The Second City.
In Foreman's book, Unbalancing Acts, he says:
To make theater, all you need is a defined space and things that enter and leave that space...Theater is presence and absence.Just the words presence and absence really stuck with me. I've been thinking about this process and how I keep taking things out of the environment and putting them back in. For instance, I sneakily acquired all this material based on what people do in Banter (the cafe). Then, I took it away. I played with it with the performers, José and Juan Pablo. Then, I will take it back to the environment in which it originated, but in a much different form.
I'm not saying this is what Foreman was saying. But just thinking about the space, and things entering and exiting seems so simple...but it can be so complex.
I was also thinking about how other artists/entertainers generate material from everyday experiences and thought of The Second City. I took some classes in their training school in Detroit, so I have a wee bit of personal experience. The kinds of scenes that were real gems were the ones that were identifiable, but so absurd or strange that you had to laugh at them. I think this juxtaposition of really normal, identifiable scenarios and bizarro-land weirdness is really interesting...
What do you think?
BONUS: We have a title!
Our performance will be called Complex Environments: This is not a bar.
bizarro-land weirdness and presence vs absence seem to have a similar vein, in my not-so humble opinion.
ReplyDeleteperhaps absence and presence can cause the weirdness? such as inserting scores (presence) in public areas when they don't seem warranted (they usually don't) or removing action in places where they often seem to go - a stage with no performer, etc. also makes me think of where's waldo (presence) books. i kind of heart his stripey shirt, too :P
p.s. i'm digging your title