At 11:58 20.12.96 -0800, L.H. Grant wrote:
>I think a major part of the problem may be our overreliance on the light
>cones and grids, both of which are excellent ideas but which do not provide
>all of the solutions or answers to our questions. In my opinion, there are
>other elements we can introduce which will still preserve the need and
>desirability of the RL stages as well as the Net and at the same time
>improve the theatricality of the performance.
At 02:53 23.12.96 -0300, santiago pereson wrote:
>remember we're dealing with computers here. i personally like to work by
>hand, but when it gets down to calculating on more than a hundred values a
>computer is certainly a big helper (isn't that why they invented them? :->
>). i usually (when composing) have Excel do the maths and then i translate
>them to musical notation. a program can be devised that will give us the
>result of a text that is fed to it.
>i was thinking of a starting point from where the actor would then move, if
>he wants to. i thought this because i didn't like the image of ulysses
>blinding ferociously the cyclop while standing stiff on a chessboard. i'll
>read the messages regarding collisions before i get on the subject.
>
>nice trick ;> but please read my message 'Re:Heavenly Bodies Collide'. i
>definitely think some improv should be permitted, or better put, promoted.
>
For me the question is how to show simultaneity! And how to show that the
ongoing on the stage is REAL (to show this to _each_ audience: to see that
the two lightcones they see are really interacting!)
First during the rehearsals some things has to be fixed. Like way of
walkings: f.e. especially when you do a musical piece you know how
important it is to time the walkings. This is kind of choreographing but
does not mean that during the actual performance the movement would lack of
spontaneity.
Conferring the relationship between Cyclops and Odysseus - what will
(perhaps) come out in the rehearsals will be that Odysseus will try to stay
away as far as possible from the monster. BUT in the moment where he blinds
him, he has to be very close to him.
That's of course only one small glance at an example. But I think we have
to look at this piece similar as to an opera: as seen for many times you
can of course direct an lovescene with the actors not touching another: I
think reason for this way was that they could sing properly. My idea of
directing love songs is (like we already did) is having the couple close
together and moving erotically.
What I mean is that I agree with Lee that the technic should NOT reduce the
expression. But I also like Santiagos idea of letting the computer provide
some information of the actors position :) That would be just one more
inclusion of the computer / new media aspect.
At 02:53 23.12.96 -0300, santiago pereson wrote:
>in the second one, actors interact with actors on other places. but there
>should be a need for this.
>
>the question is: is it different for the actor to speak to a cone than to
>speak to a representation of another actor.
>
>finally, i think virtual actors should not be light cones but virtual
>actors. more than a beam of light should be within them.
>
>how?
I definitely agree to Santiagos 2nd possibility (and I like your personal
story :)
The need of having an interaction between the stages is that we should
think as the world as one big stage. So even if some things are fixed, a
play is only real if it is performed, not if it is recorded and replayed!!
So, you think that the virtual actors do not come to live with being only
light cones and sound?
I repost Dan's mail to oudeis-tech at this point, to stress that on this
point, without having a script finished we should perform a "testversion"
of oudeis, maybe described as follows:
>At 12:07 23.12.96 -0600, Dan Zellner wrote:
>I agree with Santiago. This question of interplay between actors is
>fundamental. We have discussed many possibilities of perfomance and at this
>point I think it would be a good idea to try out the ideas and see what
>happens. Actually at this early stage the equipment isn't even needed. A
>collaborator isn't needed. Simply a stage and lighting instruments
>manipulated by crew members will do. IF you want to approximate the idea
>of incoming remote lighting/sound instructions simply have someone on a
>telephone call in lighting directions and vocals OR you can simply have
>someone situated outside of the theatre with a microphone. The microphone
>would be wired to a speaker in the theatre. All this may sound rather
>ridiculous but at least it's a simple start in seeing what you have or, to
>put it another way, you will see what the RL audience will see. Also it's
>relatively inexpensive! Of course this doesn't address equipment/technical
>problems (bandwidth, etc.) but it least it deals with the proposed mise en
>scene. I have a feeling you'll make some discoveries this way.
>
>Happy Holidays,
>
>Dan
>
>
Mon
------------------------------alles Theater--------------
Monika Wunderer wunderer@st1hobel.phl.univie.ac.at
++ 43 (1) 892 35 20
http://st1hobel.phl.univie.ac.at/~wunderer/
http://iguwnext.tuwien.ac.at/~oudeis/