We had some wonderful news this week when Belt Up was listed amongst the ‘must-see shows’ in the Guardian’s fringe preview this week. This was hugely complimentary considering that in the list we were rubbing shoulders with the likes of ‘Frantic Assembly’, ‘The Wooster Group’ and ‘Ontoerend Goed’. In 2008, when we set up Belt Up Theatre, we never expected that just over two years down the line we’d be considered alongside some of the companies that we greatly admire.
Most surprising however was one of the comments in response to this article. The Guardian website comment section is a great platform for some good discussion but occasionally you get a few numbskulls. One poster took a bit of a swing at Belt Up accusing us of being ‘establishment’ and then questioned why a professional company were at the fringe. I responded to their post, naturally, with a swift rebuttal – they were under the belief that we were receiving massive amounts of state subsidy, we are not, not even anywhere close.
Despite the poster being a bit of moron, I thought they did bring up a few interesting points. Why are we at the fringe? We’re also at the Edinburgh International Festival this year, the very festival that the fringe is on the ‘fringe’ of, doing a Behind the Scenes workshop of a new version of Bram Stoker’s Dracula. So why, when we’re included as part of the curated festival are we also on the fringe?
As a little bit of history, the Edinburgh International Festival was set up in 1947 to raise morale and so on, the same year a handful of theatre companies, not part of the festival decided to go to Edinburgh and perform anyway, and so the Fringe was born. A few years later when the Fringe Society was set up, the constitution clearly stated that there would be no vetting as to what and who was allowed to be included as part of the Fringe. It’s not a case of the Fringe being a response to the ‘establishment’ or anything it is just simply an open access policy,
This is its beauty. It’s because of this that I now work in theatre. In 2008 a group of second year university students calling themselves ‘Belt Up (nothing to see/hear)’ were allowed to take over a hotel function room, turn it into a Victorian boudoir and put on a silly amount of plays. If that idea had been pitched to any sensible person then they would have laughed in our faces. It was in that year that we picked up the Edinburgh International Festival award – an award to strengthen links between the EIF and the Fringe.
This year a group of professional theatre people calling themselves ‘Belt Up Theatre’ have been allowed to take over a massive burnt out room, turn it into a house and put on an even sillier amount of plays. We’re a lot more established than we were in 2008, we’ve had a lot more critical reception, more awards and stuff but I still reckon that if we pitched this idea to any sensible people then they’d still laugh in our faces. That’s what’s so brilliant about the Fringe; it allows very non-sensible people to do whatever the hell they like. We took on a massive amount of risk at the fringe in 2008 and this year we’re matching if not increasing that risk. We’re still riding the wave from the payoff of that 2008 risk so who knows where we’ll be 2 years down the line after this year’s.
So in answer to that poster’s question, what’s a professional company doing at the fringe? We’re going there to do things that we wouldn’t be allowed to do anywhere else. The fringe is a massive crucible for art and is something that has been invaluable in our development both professionally and artistically.
Sunday 11 July 2010
Wednesday 7 July 2010
Rehearsing with the lead part missing...
We're about 5 days in to our rehearsal schedule. With 10 shows to rehearse (the 9 shows for The House Above and Dracula for EIF) our schedule for this month is a masterpiece of excel genius.
For the type of work we do however, our rehearsals always have a very large hole in them. When making theatre in which the audience play a vital role we're constantly saying 'the audience could do this...' or 'what if the audience did this...' or 'why can't the audience do this...' or my favourite 'what the hell do we do if the audience do this...'. It sounds terrifying to essentially rehearse with a major part of the show undecided until the magical 'moment' but this really is what I find energising and exciting. Last November when we did a run of 'The Trial' at the Southwark Playhouse, we could never have planned for dealing with 50 grown adults, running around, blindfolded in the dark and then scaling the walls - in honesty we assumed that common sense would prevail and people would be aware of the terrifying dangers of doing this... whilst blindfolded. When this happened it was a heart stopping moment but we managed to keep on top of it, we just had to run and climb a little bit faster and of course we had the advantage of not being blindfolded.
For this reason, a lot of our rehearsal time is devoted to improvisational skills and spontaneity. It's impossible to plan how to deal with every scenario and so instead we train ourselves to be able to deal with any scenario extremely quickly. This means that the audience should get a greater freedom - though you always get a few scarier members. We were once asked whether the audience were allowed to stab eachother in our shows because we'd taken away the fourth wall and invited them into another world. This of course is not the case because fictional world or not, the real world laws still apply. However this does highlight an interesting point about rules. Once you take away the stalls, fourth wall, interval drinks etc, you've taken away the conventions. With convention comes familiarity, you know you take your seat, watch a play and clap at the end. Without the convention, you lose the familiarity, you lose the recognisable rules. This is where there is a major danger zone when creating work of this nature; Unless you as the artists know what the rules are then you can't expect the audience to. In the vital early rehearsals (which we've just come out of) we always make the point of establishing these rules - if the audience are allowed to interrupt scenes then how do they know when to do it? How do we tell them they can't? How do we let them take an active role in some parts and not others? All these questions are answered just so there is a very firm structure in which the audience are allowed to play freely. Non conventional theatre shouldn't be synonymous with anarchy; it's got to have a different set of rules.
More often than not, you can build these structures but an audience will always find holes in it, it's important to catch them before they see the 'strings' but it's these moments that make the structure stronger for the next show.
We always say that we can't do dress rehearsals because aside from fussing over directors and stage managers to the point of harassment, there's just no way of properly rehearsing audience interaction. This isn't a negative point whatsoever; it's the most exciting part of my job. That first performance with an audience is terrifying because it's the test, it's that moment where you see if this lovely ship you've been building is watertight (I like that analogy) and it's so rewarding when you find it is... it's also that bit more rewarding when the audience jump at your invitations and surprise you in a way you'd never think logically possible. That's what makes these rehearsals exciting, we're preparing for a big expedition with only educated guesses on the landscape and climate (slightly more tenuous analogy) and that's what I think theatre is about - the live moment, that liveness that only comes from an almost random assortment of strangers (unless they're all a school group or something, or a work bonding experience - we've had that before) working together to create the finished product.
So, that was a little ramble about how important the audience has to be in our rehearsal process and how much they are missed.
Less than a month though till everything comes together though!
For the type of work we do however, our rehearsals always have a very large hole in them. When making theatre in which the audience play a vital role we're constantly saying 'the audience could do this...' or 'what if the audience did this...' or 'why can't the audience do this...' or my favourite 'what the hell do we do if the audience do this...'. It sounds terrifying to essentially rehearse with a major part of the show undecided until the magical 'moment' but this really is what I find energising and exciting. Last November when we did a run of 'The Trial' at the Southwark Playhouse, we could never have planned for dealing with 50 grown adults, running around, blindfolded in the dark and then scaling the walls - in honesty we assumed that common sense would prevail and people would be aware of the terrifying dangers of doing this... whilst blindfolded. When this happened it was a heart stopping moment but we managed to keep on top of it, we just had to run and climb a little bit faster and of course we had the advantage of not being blindfolded.
For this reason, a lot of our rehearsal time is devoted to improvisational skills and spontaneity. It's impossible to plan how to deal with every scenario and so instead we train ourselves to be able to deal with any scenario extremely quickly. This means that the audience should get a greater freedom - though you always get a few scarier members. We were once asked whether the audience were allowed to stab eachother in our shows because we'd taken away the fourth wall and invited them into another world. This of course is not the case because fictional world or not, the real world laws still apply. However this does highlight an interesting point about rules. Once you take away the stalls, fourth wall, interval drinks etc, you've taken away the conventions. With convention comes familiarity, you know you take your seat, watch a play and clap at the end. Without the convention, you lose the familiarity, you lose the recognisable rules. This is where there is a major danger zone when creating work of this nature; Unless you as the artists know what the rules are then you can't expect the audience to. In the vital early rehearsals (which we've just come out of) we always make the point of establishing these rules - if the audience are allowed to interrupt scenes then how do they know when to do it? How do we tell them they can't? How do we let them take an active role in some parts and not others? All these questions are answered just so there is a very firm structure in which the audience are allowed to play freely. Non conventional theatre shouldn't be synonymous with anarchy; it's got to have a different set of rules.
More often than not, you can build these structures but an audience will always find holes in it, it's important to catch them before they see the 'strings' but it's these moments that make the structure stronger for the next show.
We always say that we can't do dress rehearsals because aside from fussing over directors and stage managers to the point of harassment, there's just no way of properly rehearsing audience interaction. This isn't a negative point whatsoever; it's the most exciting part of my job. That first performance with an audience is terrifying because it's the test, it's that moment where you see if this lovely ship you've been building is watertight (I like that analogy) and it's so rewarding when you find it is... it's also that bit more rewarding when the audience jump at your invitations and surprise you in a way you'd never think logically possible. That's what makes these rehearsals exciting, we're preparing for a big expedition with only educated guesses on the landscape and climate (slightly more tenuous analogy) and that's what I think theatre is about - the live moment, that liveness that only comes from an almost random assortment of strangers (unless they're all a school group or something, or a work bonding experience - we've had that before) working together to create the finished product.
So, that was a little ramble about how important the audience has to be in our rehearsal process and how much they are missed.
Less than a month though till everything comes together though!
Thursday 1 July 2010
Once more unto the breach...
It's the night before the start of the mega rehearsal schedule for Belt Up's 'The House Above'. Had a realisation that my next day off is now the 3rd of September!
From tomorrow until the 26th of July, it's 12 hour days of rehearsal 10 till 10 wearing writer, director and actor hats on and off throughout.
Am looking forward to it though - especially because I get to revisit some old friends in Salvador Dali and Gregor Samsa. Haven't been Gregor for two years now so it's quite exciting to be 'putting him on' again (though my state of fitness has declined somewhat requiring most of my time off - i.e. when I'm not asleep - being dedicated to the gym).
From tomorrow until the 26th of July, it's 12 hour days of rehearsal 10 till 10 wearing writer, director and actor hats on and off throughout.
Am looking forward to it though - especially because I get to revisit some old friends in Salvador Dali and Gregor Samsa. Haven't been Gregor for two years now so it's quite exciting to be 'putting him on' again (though my state of fitness has declined somewhat requiring most of my time off - i.e. when I'm not asleep - being dedicated to the gym). Looking forward very much to returning to Salvador Dali, had a dream in character the other night which was incredibly bizarre, not surprising considering it was a dream as Dali. Was probably influenced a lot by a visit to 'The Surreal House' on saturday at the Barbican where they've got his 'Sleep' on display.
I'm aiming to keep a regular diary going on here throughout the prep for 'The House Above' and the Edinburgh festival itself. Haven't got much else to say in this one so I'll avoid dragging it out, I guess the main point is that a massive load of rehearsals start tomorrow and this is exciting. Point made.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)