View this page "Try Not To Step On The Naked Man"
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Sayrah Langenberg-Miller
Apr 16, 2008, 5:50:02 PM4/16/08
to acting2
Click on http://groups.google.com/group/acting2/web/try-not-to-step-on-the-naked-man
- or copy & paste it into your browser's address bar if that doesn't
work.
Frank
Apr 23, 2008, 7:31:08 PM4/23/08
to acting2
Sorry I was not in Class on Monday. I was assigned at the last minute
to help with a presentation on "Food Security." A very interesting
concept, though off topic, please look it up! http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsec/
I would like to continue with the scene as Barker.
I have a couple notes I wrote about Barker,
Who - Barker is the embodiment of societal conformity - a smarmy
proper preppy guy - from the city. he's never gotten muddy in his
life. All his friends are white, and he's never been to a non-white
person's house. His parents spoiled him, and took him to church where
he learned to conform even more, and fear the human body and germs.
What - Barker is put in a place where he must respond to a nude
person in his living room.
Where - he lives in a suburb, in a clean and tidy house, thanks to the
woman who he feels is in place to keep it tidy - her function is
limited in his mind
When - its in the 1980s, when the itchy sweaters were popular
Why - he wants to escape the possibility of growth - he doesn't want
to change and learn about himself. to do so would make him want to
escape the disgustingly predictable
all in all, its an ugly man in a situation he is uncomfortable in -
yet could stand the most to gain from the experience.
I was thinking the naked man could be a symbol of elusive happiness.
On Apr 16, 1:50 pm, Sayrah Langenberg-Miller <slangm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Click onhttp://groups.google.com/group/acting2/web/try-not-to-step-on-the-nak...
to help with a presentation on "Food Security." A very interesting
concept, though off topic, please look it up! http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsec/
I would like to continue with the scene as Barker.
I have a couple notes I wrote about Barker,
Who - Barker is the embodiment of societal conformity - a smarmy
proper preppy guy - from the city. he's never gotten muddy in his
life. All his friends are white, and he's never been to a non-white
person's house. His parents spoiled him, and took him to church where
he learned to conform even more, and fear the human body and germs.
What - Barker is put in a place where he must respond to a nude
person in his living room.
Where - he lives in a suburb, in a clean and tidy house, thanks to the
woman who he feels is in place to keep it tidy - her function is
limited in his mind
When - its in the 1980s, when the itchy sweaters were popular
Why - he wants to escape the possibility of growth - he doesn't want
to change and learn about himself. to do so would make him want to
escape the disgustingly predictable
all in all, its an ugly man in a situation he is uncomfortable in -
yet could stand the most to gain from the experience.
I was thinking the naked man could be a symbol of elusive happiness.
On Apr 16, 1:50 pm, Sayrah Langenberg-Miller <slangm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Click onhttp://groups.google.com/group/acting2/web/try-not-to-step-on-the-nak...
Sayrah Langenberg-Miller
Apr 25, 2008, 12:57:19 PM4/25/08
to acting2
Frank,
Awesome on the 5 W's. However, I've been taking the road that all the
characters are entirely Brecht-ian, and not at all method. None of
them seem to me to be more than skin-deep. They're supposed to incite
the knee-jerk reaction, to present the audience with a series of
stimuli and to make the audience react. Barker is the embodiment of
social structure, "posh", of social normalcies, and good, capitalist
thought. He is essentially the meaning behind "Politically Correct".
Donna is everything a good housewife should be, but there's a twist
with her. She also embodies female empowerment, especially before the
woman's movement. She is the emotional side to the couple, she is his
lesser but greater half. Frank is simply an object. I like the idea of
Frank only being a manikin because it puts further into light the
situation between social qualms and simple humanity. If Frank is not
even human, it makes the audience look into themselves to determine
what makes humanity, what makes any action "acceptable", and who
decides?
I love the idea of Frank. He is simply one big question. He answers
simply, like a child, but the questions he asks are more than
subtexted. "would you like a summer sausage?" becomes: how comfortable
with yourself are you? are you intimidated by another man because he
is able to look at himself and let others look at him? are you
unhappy? what are your emotions? are you repulsed by the thought of a
masculine body? are you thinking about how others perceive you? but
most importantly, are you afraid of this body because it is human, and
alive, and willing to be exposed and you are none of these?
and that last question is not for Barker, it is for the audience. The
audience never fully sees Frank, so they never really get the
opportunity to judge themselves against Barker's or Donna's reactions.
It makes me wonder what a person would do after seeing this play.
BBB,
-Sayrah
Awesome on the 5 W's. However, I've been taking the road that all the
characters are entirely Brecht-ian, and not at all method. None of
them seem to me to be more than skin-deep. They're supposed to incite
the knee-jerk reaction, to present the audience with a series of
stimuli and to make the audience react. Barker is the embodiment of
social structure, "posh", of social normalcies, and good, capitalist
thought. He is essentially the meaning behind "Politically Correct".
Donna is everything a good housewife should be, but there's a twist
with her. She also embodies female empowerment, especially before the
woman's movement. She is the emotional side to the couple, she is his
lesser but greater half. Frank is simply an object. I like the idea of
Frank only being a manikin because it puts further into light the
situation between social qualms and simple humanity. If Frank is not
even human, it makes the audience look into themselves to determine
what makes humanity, what makes any action "acceptable", and who
decides?
I love the idea of Frank. He is simply one big question. He answers
simply, like a child, but the questions he asks are more than
subtexted. "would you like a summer sausage?" becomes: how comfortable
with yourself are you? are you intimidated by another man because he
is able to look at himself and let others look at him? are you
unhappy? what are your emotions? are you repulsed by the thought of a
masculine body? are you thinking about how others perceive you? but
most importantly, are you afraid of this body because it is human, and
alive, and willing to be exposed and you are none of these?
and that last question is not for Barker, it is for the audience. The
audience never fully sees Frank, so they never really get the
opportunity to judge themselves against Barker's or Donna's reactions.
It makes me wonder what a person would do after seeing this play.
BBB,
-Sayrah
Frank
Apr 28, 2008, 7:14:44 PM4/28/08
to acting2
It's definitely a cute script, and fun to work with. As far as the
play being an Epic-style piece I do have to agree with you, in that it
has an overall message and that that is the core of the text. I don't
think anyone would be deluded enough not to feel the "alienation
effect." But I do think an added layer, blending some of the method
acting styles would add interest. I don't think much Meyerhold or
biomechanics is in order, especially since the design calls for Frank
not to be seen, however I don't really see how a mannequin would add
to the scene either. Not unless by some technological wizardry we
have your voice emanating from the plastic body itself... Which we
may be able to arrange.
Frank
On Apr 25, 8:57 am, Sayrah Langenberg-Miller <slangm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
play being an Epic-style piece I do have to agree with you, in that it
has an overall message and that that is the core of the text. I don't
think anyone would be deluded enough not to feel the "alienation
effect." But I do think an added layer, blending some of the method
acting styles would add interest. I don't think much Meyerhold or
biomechanics is in order, especially since the design calls for Frank
not to be seen, however I don't really see how a mannequin would add
to the scene either. Not unless by some technological wizardry we
have your voice emanating from the plastic body itself... Which we
may be able to arrange.
Frank
On Apr 25, 8:57 am, Sayrah Langenberg-Miller <slangm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages