FREEDOM, STRUCTURE, FREEDOM:

ANNE BOGART'S DIRECTING PHILOSOPHY

by

DAGNE OLSBERG, B.A., M.A.

A DISSERTATION

IN

FINE ARTS

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in

Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Approved

December, 1994

Copyright 1994, Dagne Olsberg

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Above all, I want to thank Anne Bogart for giving me permission to pursue this project, for her generosity, for allowing me the privilege of attending the rehearsals for The Women, and for taking the time for interviews. Thanks also to the actors and the staff of the production of The Women at Hartford Stage, especially to Lynn Cohen, Karen Kandel, Ellen Lauren, Maria Porter, Laila Robins, and Myra Lucretia Taylor for sharing such a precious insight. Thanks to photographer T. Charles Erickson for the permission to include reproductions of his production photographs and to Jennifer Dana at the Saratoga International Theater Institute for her assistance. Special thanks to Professor George W. Sorensen for his dedication and his guidance in the development of this study. I would also like to thank the committee members for serving on my committee. Also, thanks to my friends and colleagues who have encouraged me in my work. Thanks to Simon Ha and Alison Russo for reading part of this stud^ and giving me helpful comments, and to Karen Osman and Amy Freeman without whom this study may not ever have ended up in printed form. Finally, I thank my family for always being there for me and for giving me support, of all kinds, and my husband, Shivcharn, for his care and for always being a source of encouragement and inspiration. I would like to dedicate this work to my parents, Gerd and Erik Olsberg.

The tropistic tension between the inner process and the form strengthens both. The form is like a baited trap, to which the spiritual process responds spontaneously and against which it struggles. [Jerzy Grotowski, Towards a Poor Theatre, p. 17]

11

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS vj CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ] Notes 8

II. OVERVIEW OF ANNE BOGART' S WORK S Notes 21

III. VIEWPOINT TRAINING 2A Introduction 24 Introductory Viewpoint Exercises 2 6 Introduction to "Shape" and "Kinesthetic Response" 3C

"Shape" 30 "Kinesthetic Response" 31

The Viewpoints 32 "Spatial Relationship" 32 "Shape" 33

< "Architecture" 33 "Kinesthetic Response" 34 "Repetition" 35 "Gesture" 35 "Tempo" 36

Viewpoint Improvisation 36 Important "Principles" of the Viewpoint Improvisation 38

Response 38 Discovery 4C Risk-taking 4] Stillness, Variation, Clarity and Specificity. 4] "Icing on the Cake" 42 "Lyricism" 42

Conclusion 4; Notes 4 (

IV. DIRECTING PHILOSOPHY 4" Rehearsal: A Meeting Place 4' Directing Philosophy 5i

Viewpoint Improvisation and Composition 5( iii

The Viewpoint Training and the Rehearsal .... 51 Form and Inner Life 53 Communication with the Actor 56 Rehearsal as Composition 56 The Violence of "Setting" Material 57

Notes 5S V. THE REHEARSAL PROCESS 6]

First Day of Rehearsal 62 Viewpoint Sessions 63 "Table Work" 66 Staging Rehearsals 70

"Setting" the Scenes 72 The Musical Number I Don't Want to Play in Your Yard 7 8 Preparing for Rehearsal 81 Juxtaposition of Text and Choreography 82 Collaboration: "Composition" 84 Collaboration: Communication with the Actors . 89

The "Rebirth" or "Resurrection" of the Scenes .. 93 Technical Rehearsals and Preview Week 97 Actors' Response about the Process 99

Ensemble and Collaboration 100 The Viewpoint Training 102 The "Table Work" 105 Choreography and Movement Patterns 107 Co-creators 114

Observations 115 Notes 11'

VI. THE PRODUCTION OF THE WOMEN 13i The Production 13^

The First Encounter 135 The Set 138 The Transitions 138 "The Chorus of Women" 13S Objects Becoming Symbols 14C Music 143 Feminist Play 1A<

Analysis of the Composition 14^ Notes 15(

VII. CONCLUSION AND EVALUATION 15: Director's Function 15:

iv

structure Leading to Freedom 153 Collaboration: Actor as Co-creator 155 The Rehearsal Cycle: Freedom, Structure, Freedom 159 Conclusion 161 Notes 163

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 164 APPENDIX A. ANNE BOGART'S DIRECTING HISTORY 170 B. REHEARSAL SCHEDULE OF THE PRODUCTION

OF THE WOMEN 176 C. PERMISSION LETTER FROM COPYRIGHT OWNER 179

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

5 .1 The Women, Pre-show 120 5.2 The Women, Act I , Scene 1 122 5 .3 The Women, Act I I , Scene 4 124 5.4 The Women, Act I I , Scene 5 126 5 .5 The Women, I Don't Want to Play in Your Yard . . . . 128 5 .6 The Women, Act I , Scene 2 130 5.7 The Women, Act I , Scene 4 132 5 .8 Movement p a t t e r n from " b r i d g e - s c e n e , " The Women . 134

VI

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

Starting at the end of the last century and increasingly during the course of our own, the theatre has become colonised by a determined group: the directors. . . .

There are a number of consequences of this unchallenged hegemony which devolve most strikingly on the actors and the writers. Actors, quite clearly, have been stripped of initiative and responsibility. They wait to be hired; having been hired, they wait to be told how to play their roles (how, that is, to fit into the director's 'concept'); and in the execution of the role and their conduct during its realisation, they strive to please the director in order to be allowed to exercise their craft again. All important decisions about the production have been taken before their involvement, and they are as much as possible kept ignorant of the factors which govern the fate of the production in which they're involved. . . .

A distressing consequence of this development for actors is that the director has interposed himself between actor and writer, claiming that they cannot speak each other's language. . . .

The important thing is to restore the writer . . . and the actor to each other, without the self-elected intervention of the director, claiming a unique position interpreting one to the other. We don't need an interpreterwe speak the same language: or at least we used to.^

In this manner Simon Callow, the British actor, proposes the elimination of the director in his manifesto (1984). Although one may disagree with his provocative proposal. Callow touches on aspects concerning the relationship between director and actor that may deserve consideration. In many cases, actors have been "stripped of initiative and responsibility"; in many cases, actors are excluded from partaking in "important decisions"; and, in many cases, actors are "kept ignorant of the factors which govern the fate of the production." Callow's manifesto, thus, draws

1

attention to important questions about what the nature of the relationship between actors and director should be. Is the actor just one of many elements to embody the director's vision; or should the actor take a larger part in the creation and the development of the production? What is the function of the actor; what is the function of the director; and what should be the nature of their collaboration?

Callow's position is understandable. It is understandable that an actor reacts to the kind of "role" that he or she is given in the whole rehearsal process. There is, however, more to a director's job than interpreting the text, which Callow seems to suggest it to be. Today's theatre is not only about text. A production may be based on text or on a deconstruction of a text, or the text may be created by the actors through improvisation. Since Antonin Artaud, however, many theatre artists have claimed that theatre is not subordinated to text, but that the language of the stage is the mise en sceneall the physical elements creating the visual and aural composition in space--and that theatre pieces should, thus, be fully created in the theatre space.

Whether basing a production on a text or not, the interaction of all the artistic elements of the stage--the mise en scene--has become increasingly important. Thus has grown the need for an "outside eye" to ensure a strong composition and expression. Edward Gordon Craig and Vsevolod Meyerhold were revolutionary in their merging of all the elements creating a total expression. Later directors like Richard Foreman and Robert Wilson, whose theatre has been characterized by Bonnie Marranca as "theatre of images,"^ have become known for their compelling stage compositions. In the process of creating strong visual and aural compositions, many of these directors or theorists, however, have been accused of being

"autocrat directors" and treating the actors as "puppets," stifling the actors' creativity.

During the 1960s and the 1970s, perhaps as a reaction to the auteur director, theatre artists or companies wanted to give the emphasis and the role as creator back to the actor. Groups like the Living Theatre, the Open Theatre, and the Performance Group developed pieces as a collaborative effort through improvisation. One could say that this would give the actor the ultimate freedom. The problem that some encountered, however, was how to bring the stage of exploration or improvisation to the stage of performance.

Improvisation may be good for exploration and discovery, but may be hard to transfer to the performance mode. Furthermore, with the actors collectively creating the composition, not having an "outside eye" to help in composing the mise en scene, the production may lack focus and a strong expression.

In this brief overview, extremes have been chosen to address the ranges in the actor's and director's functions and to bring up the possibility of combining "the best from both worlds"the actors having significant creative input, as well as the creation of a strong composition. In attempting this, the challenge would be to, on one hand, find a way to create a rehearsal situation where everyone is a creator, where the actors are given the freedom to create and to contribute in a significant way to the development and the shaping of the production. At the same time, the challenge would be to find a way to bring the collective exploration to a performance mode, ensuring a mise en scene with a strong expression, seen with the audience's and the director's eye.

Anne Bogart, the director, appears to have been able to combine these two. That the actor is a "creator"the actor being given the freedom to contribute in a

significant wayseems to be the underlying value of Bogart's directing philosophy. This value is reflected in every aspect of the rehearsal. At the same time, Bogart has come to realize the need for structure in the rehearsal, that there is a need to "set things" and that this is the director's job. She calls this a "violent" but "necessary act." Although Bogart eventually "sets" the staging or the choreographythe formit is created collaboratively based on what the actors bring to the scene.

The form or structure, in turn, Bogart maintains, gives the actor freedom: a precise choreography, relieving the actors of the concern of what to do physically with their bodies, freeing up the actor to concentrate fully on the interpretation. The form is "set," while the emotions remain "fluid." Structure leads to freedom,^ Bogart proposes.

Furthermore, Bogart has developed an actor training technique called "viewpoint training," that prepares the actors to "become creators." In addition to creating an ensemble feel, creating a common vocabulary for the collaborators, and encouraging spontaneity, it develops in the actors a sensibility to make compositional choices. It, thus, prepares the actor for the staging rehearsal. This training, particularly the "viewpoint improvisation," provides ultimate freedom for the actor. Although this improvisation is not used during the actual staging rehearsal, Bogart attempts to bring a similar sense of freedom to the "setting" of the staging or the choreography.

Bogart combines both "structure" and "freedom"; these two "opposites," one could claim, coexist in Bogart's rehearsals in an intriguing way. Bogart appears to have been able to create a rehearsal situation where the actors are true collaborators. She gives them the freedom to

shape the production with her and, at the same time, together they choreograph all the elements into a compelling and strong expression. In doing so, Bogart seems to have brought new aspects toif not redefinedthe nature of collaboration between actor and director.

In recent years there has been an attempt to give an account of contemporary directors' work and to capture various approaches to developing a production. Books like Arthur Bartow's The Director's Voice: Twenty-One Interviews (1988),^ Laurence Shyer's Robert Wilson and His Collaborators (1989),^ and Susan Letzler Cole's Directors in Rehearsal: A Hidden World (1992)^ are excellent contributions. This study serves as an addition to the literature on contemporary directors' approaches to directing and the rehearsal process.

The study is primarily based upon notes from participating in Bogart's "viewpoint training" and "composition" classes during the summer workshop at the Saratoga International Theater Institute (SITI) in the summer of 1993; the symposia given by Bogart at the workshop; interviews with Bogart; notes from observing the entire rehearsal process of The Women by Clare Boothe Luce, directed by Bogart at Hartford Stage in December, 1993 through January, 1994; and interviews with some of the actors in The Women. These unique opportunities, both in hearing Bogart talk about her philosophies and theories on theatre and observing the rehearsal process for one of her productions, provided important insight into Bogart's rehearsal philosophy. This study offers a discussion of Bogart's directorial principles and practices and evaluates them for study and application by other directors.

Chapter II gives a brief overview of Bogart's work, her philosophy of theatre, and artists who have influenced her. It addresses Bogart's rationale behind "deconstructing"

plays, and her dedication to working with and developing work dealing with the American performance tradition.

Chapter III discusses the "viewpoint training," Bogart's actor training technique. It includes a description of some of the introductory exercises and the "viewpoint improvisation." The last section discusses how the training stimulates ensemble work and the actor's awareness of spatial and temporal composition.

Chapter IV addresses the underlying value of Bogart's directing philosophythe rehearsal as a collaborative process. It also discusses various aspects of Bogart's directing philosophy: the relationship between the viewpoint training and the rehearsal process; Bogart's belief that by "setting" the form or choreography, the inner life of the character is allowed to remain "fluid"; and Bogart's analogy that the staging rehearsal is like composing a piece of music. It concludes with Bogart's recollection of the episode when she came to the realization of the importance of setting the form or the choreography"the violence of setting something on stage."

Chapter V describes Bogart's rehearsal process and uses the rehearsal of The Women as a way of gaining insight into Bogart's directing philosophy. The end of the chapter includes excerpts from interviews with some of the actors in The Women, in which they discuss how they experienced the rehearsal process. Chapter VI discusses the production of The Women and how Bogart's unique approach to staging appears to have influenced the aesthetics of the production.

Chapter VII summarizes what appear to be recurrent aspects of Bogart's rehearsal process. It discusses how Bogart is able to create a situation where the actors are true collaborators, and how she, at the same time, is able to create a structure, which, in turn, gives freedom to the actor. It proposes that Bogart's directing philosophy

could be characterized as a cycle"freedom, structure, freedom."

Notes 1 Simon Callow, Being an Actor (New York: St. Martin's

Press, 1984), 185-86,88.

^ Bonnie Marranca, introduction to The Theatre of Images, ed. Bonnie Marranca (New York: Drama Book Specialists (Publishers), 1977), x.

^William K. Gale, "Anne Bogart," Providence (RI) Journal-Bulletin, 23 April 1989, [p. M6 first page of the article].

''Arthur Bartow, The Director' s Voice: Twenty-One Interviews (New York: Theatre Communications Group, 1988).

^ Laurence Shyer, Rojbert Wilson and His Collaborators (New York: Theatre Communications Group, 1989).

^ Susan Letzler Cole, Directors in Rehearsal: A Hidden World (New York: Routledge, Chapman & Hall, 1992).

8

CHAPTER II OVERVIEW OF ANNE BOGART'S WORK

Anne Bogart is a prolific and controversial director. In a recent article in the New York Times, Mel Gussow describes the disagreement about her work among both audiences and critics: "Depending on the point of view, she is either an innovator or a provocateur assaulting a text."^ She often gets labeled "iconoclast," "deconstructionist," or "conceptual postmodernist." During her less-than-twenty-year career as a director, she has directed a variety of types of productions: modern dramas, musicals, operas, contemporary plays and "collaborative dance-theatre pieces."^ She has directed in environmental spaces (Manhattan), off-Broadway, off-off-Broadway, at regional theatres, and in Europe. She has directed at the Public Theater, En Garde Arts, American Repertory Theater, San Diego Repertory, and Actors Theatre of Louisville.

She served as artistic director for Trinity Repertory Company in Providence, Rhode Island, for the 1989-90 season; and she is co-artistic director of Via Theater that she founded with Brian Jucha in 1987. Recently she and the Japanese director, Tadashi Suzuki, founded the Saratoga International Theater Institute (SITI), with its inaugural season 5-13 September 1992.^ SITI is dedicated to developing new pieces of work, international exchange through symposia and visiting artists, and training programs for actors and other theatre artists.

Bogart is not only important for the contributions (often controversial ones) that her productions have given to the contemporary theatre scene, but she is also known as an educator. Constantly searching to develop the art, not only learning from other theatre artists, but also frequently going to the other arts and the theories of other arts for inspiration, she willingly shares her

thoughts, theories and anecdotes. Having taught at the Experimental Theatre Wing of the Tisch School of the Arts (New York University); University of California, San Diego; American Repertory Theatre (ART) Conservatory; and Bennington College, she currently heads the graduate theatre directing program at Columbia University. She also gives workshops at SITI, teaching her actor training technique, "viewpoint training," and "composition." During the years she has gained a following of actors and theatre students. According to Robert Coe, already in the mid-1980s she had gained a "guru-like devotion from students."*

In her comprehensive article, "From the Battle to the Gift: The Directing of Anne Bogart" (1992),^ Eelka Lampe gives an account of Bogart's directing history, including a list of all of Bogart's productions from 1976 through 1991 (see Appendix A) and talks about Bogart's formative years as a director and about artists that influenced her work. This article also includes an in-depth analysis of the choreography of movements in the production History^ an American Dream (1983), and a description of the rehearsal process of Danton's Death (1986), staged at New York University. Robert Coe's article, "The Once and Future Trinity: Now Anne Bogart Holds the Key to the House that Hall Built" (1990),^ also gives an overview of Bogart's work.

Bogart's early experimental pieces that she developed in Manhattan in the late 1970s were often done in locations like streets, apartments and lofts. Among these was Out of Sync (1980), an adaptation of The Seagull, for which she received a Villager Award. The production is described at length in Jessica Abbe's article, "Anne Bogart's Journeys" (1980).' In this adaptation the audience encounters Nic making a film with Karina and Peter as actors; Karina dreams of a film acting career in Rome; Nic, an aspiring film director, is hopelessly in love with her; Nic's

10

half-sister, Edith, and her lover Zagreb--both famous film-makerspay a visit. The audience members (twenty to thirty) follow the story, first assembling at an East Village cafe; then they are led by Bogart to a second floor loft, where they witness Acts I and II; then they, through a cumbersome walk through the streets, through a playground, and through a courtyard, end up outside of a basement room where Act III takes place, observing this act through the windows; then the "journey" continues past a boiler room to the basement room for Act IV; and, finally, they are led back to the street where the final act takes place.

Abbe describes Bogart's work at this time: Bogart composes precisely choreographed dances and series of movements whose appeal is visual rather than visceral. Within one play are juxtapositions of stagey actions within a naturalistic environment, and tiny, awkward mannerisms codified into whole scenes. A moment, gesture or glance between characters is broken down into structural beats, which are then repeated with changes in tempo, resulting in subtle alterations in meaning. This kind of structure provides counterpoint to "'.e intimate and the naturalistic."

The distinctly eclectic style gives rise to the manner in which a narrativea series of revelations about the relationships between charactersis exposed through details. In the context of an ultrareal locale, seemingly pedestrian activities are loaded with Chekhovian significance. But the contrasting structural elements keep this significance from becoming overwhelming. They distance the audience.^

Bogart's production of South Pacific (1984) at New York University got a Bessie Award (New York Dance and Performance Award). It was highly acclaimed and controversial, of course, with the play being set in a rehabilitation ward for war veterans who had suffered a traumatic experience (in Beirut or Grenada). The clients

11

put on South Pacific as a "graduation ceremony."^ Lampe describes a scene from the production:

On Bali Ha'i Lieutenant Joe Cable, just after making love to islander Liat, breaks into the romantic song "Younger than springtime are you . . ." which modulates into "younger than springtime am I . . ." Cable might simply be declaring his love to Liat, which is how the Broadway musical and the movie play the scene. In the Bogart version Joe Cable rejoices over his own youth, strength, and sexual potency. Liat is reduced to no more than a stimulus releasing Cable's energy. The words are directly addressed to Liat, but Cable's whole posture ignores her physical presence. He touches her in a mechanized way while vibrantly presenting his own body to the audience. Liat crawls like a dog around his feet. This scene is doubled by the two other couples, one with a gender-crossed male Liat and female officer.^ "

Coe describes how the event was received: "The Hammerstein estate cheerfully denied NYU permission to extend the show, but word of Bogart's meta-critical hoot spread like wildfire across the downtown theatre-dance-performance world. "^^

The success of South Pacific led to Bogart's being offered to stage The Making of Americans (1985),^^ an adaptation of Leon Katz and Al Carmines' opera based on Gertrude Stein's novel, produced by Music Theater Group. In 1988 Bogart staged another opera adaptation Cinderella/Cendrillon, based on Jules Massenet's opera Cendrillon, also produced by Music Theater Group in collaboration with Via Theater. According to Coe, this "postmodern retelling" was Bogart's "finest work to date.""

For her production No Plays No Poetry But Philosophical Reflections Practical Instructions Provocative Prescriptions Opinions and Pointers from a Noted Critic and Playwright, produced by Via Theater, the Talking Band, and Otrabanda (1988), Bogart received an Obie Award. This production was based on writings by Bertolt Brecht. Bogart

12

later revived the production as her first production at Trinity Repertory Company (1989). Coe calls the event "the single most aesthetically radical inaugural event in the history of the nation's resident theatre movement."^" He describes:

Led into the concrete scene shop through a side door, the opening night mob in Providence was accosted by actor Paul Zimet shouting through a megaphone, "I don't think the traditional form of theatre means anything any longer! Works by such people as Ibsen and Strindberg no longer move anybody!" Virtually every word in the 90-minute performance which followed were [sic] taken directly from Bertolt Brecht's scathing polemics for the theatre; after the opening harangue the audience was free to roam the Lederer's stages, hallways, backstage dressing room and Escher-like stairwells, discovering a range of makeshift attractions: A peep show, a sex education class, a boombox rapper, a lecture on bread, and other circuslike apparitions in which virtually nothing anyone said has anything to do with their actual behavior, unfolding as a kind of disintegrated spectacle-symposiuma post-Brechtian deconstruction of Brecht in a Hall of Mirrors. "^^

In 1992 Bogart received a second Obie Award, this time for a new playThe Baltimore Waltz by Paula Vogel produced by Circle Repertory Company. The playa comedy deals with AIDS and is a dedication to Vogel's own brother who died of the disease four years earlier. It is about Anna who, as a reaction to her brother, Carl, dying of AIDS, fantasizes that she and her brother are on an adventurous trip in Europe together, only that in her dream, she is the one who is ill (a disease allegorically called ATD).^^ Gerald Weales (in a review in Commonweal) writes: "The Baltimore Waltz . . . must be the funniest AIDS play ever writtenwhich does not mean that it is not an extremely moving one."^^ Greg Evans {Variety) writes: "Director Anne Bogart skillfully blends silliness with sadness. Her light tone is well suited to Vogel's

13

illusions. . . . The Baltimore Waltz is as bracing as the dance that ends it."^

Although she has been greatly influenced by European directors and theatre, Bogart has also realized that her American roots are important. She has, thus, recently devoted her work to the American theatre heritage.^^ Among numerous other projects, Bogart's current work is developing a trilogy of original plays on American entertainment: American Vaudeville was originally produced by Movement Research (1991) and later by the Alley Theater in Houston (1992); Marathon Dancing was first produced at University of Iowa and recently by En Garde Arts (1994); the next play in the trilogy will be The Birth of a Nation, which will be about silent movie acting.^ "

In a keynote lecture at Actors Theatre of Louisville (1993), Bogart reminds American artists about the importance of their own performance tradition. She says:

Even today, much of our mainstream theater is an imitation of the Western European tradition of theater. But this dependence belies an inherent difference in our natures. Europe is a literary culture. America, on the other hand, is an aural cultural [sic]. In our evangelical natures, the sound of the words take precedent [sic] over their meaning. We are ill at ease with literature on stage yet we pretend not to be. This pretense makes for a false feel in the theater.

And yet I sense that we have been the innovators of some pretty great stuff in the world of performance. Jazz, the American musical, and the phenomenon of Vaudeville form part of our unique cultural heritage. Unfortunately, we often perceive this art as lowbrow; thin, populist tender. I suggest that it is NOT. I suggest that we have a rich and unique cultural history and that to celebrate it is to remember it. To remember it is to use it. To use it is to be true to who we are.^ ^

Recently, Bogart's production of The Medium opened at New York Theater Workshop, a revival of the production that

14

premiered at SITI in 1993. It is an original work, based on the writings of Marshall McLuhan. Although critics questioned the way McLuhan's "message" was handled, many noted the production's compelling expression. Ben Brantley describes, what he characterizes as a "vivid, surprisingly diverting piece of expressionist theater":

The Medium is a visual and aural collage that exists both in the Op-and-Pop past of McLuhan's heyday and the present of virtual reality and a galloping communications industry that turns yesterday into instant nostalgia.

While McLuhan (Tom Nelis) spouts gnomic epigrams, the other four performers, lacing McLuhanisms with more contemporary references, act out a jerky, robotic ballet that gives the lie to the pundit's optimism. Wearing Gabriel Berry's graphic Mod costumes, they cross the stage in hunched postures suggesting windup Quasimodos, respond to zapping noises as if they were electrocuted frogs and collapse stiffly onto brightly colored vinyl chairs. A Max Headroom-like stand-up comedian "from cyberspace" talks about virtual reality, and a Vegas-style ventriloquist finds his identity usurped by his shrill dummy.

The precise choreography ranges from ritualistic waltzes that turn into strangleholds to joyless voguing. Blithe 1960's pop music tinkles ironically in the background.^^

One of the reasons why Bogart is seen by some as a "provocateur assaulting a text," to use again Gussow's words, is the way she often deconstructs texts, particularly classics. To Bogart, the question of how to deal with the classicshow to deal with a play that the audience already has a knowledge of and associations about, a play with a shared "cultural memory" or "baggage"--is a crucial question. She feels that there is a need "in the postmodern world" (previously she used to dislike the term "postmodernism," but has come to accept it because of how it addresses reexamination of the classics)" to consider this shared cultural "baggage."

15

One essay that has been particularly helpful to Bogart in dealing with this question is Heinrich von Kleist's Uber das Marionettentheater.^* From this essay she learned: "Since the fall of Adam and Eve, the loss of innocence, we are aware of what we're doing while we're doing it. So we cannot enter paradise from the front gate."" Instead, one has to "go around the world and enter through the back door."

She proposes, thus, that when doing a classic one needs to take the audience's "baggage" about the play into considerationto make the "baggage" part of the productionthat one needs to "present the material through a frame," or make the play "contain its baggage." Bogart says about A Streetcar Named Desire:

How does an actor play Stanley Kowalski? Do you enter through the front door and pretend like it never happened before? Or do you walk around the back of the world and assume . . . Marlon Brando inside of you? Do you include him as part of it, because you are conscious of somebody else having played itof all the Streetcars you've ever seen?^ ^

Bogart feels that the artist has the responsibility to recognize that the audience has a "baggage" of the play and that it has knowledge, feelings and associations about it. (Bogart explains that when seeing a play for the first time, one tends to experience it in a linear way, but when seeing one that one is familiar withthat has a "baggage"one sees it in a more "associative" way.)^ ''

Another aspect concerning doing classics is the question of the necessity of doing it"who needs to do it?" This has led Bogart to approach a number of her earlier productions through, what she calls "personas." The actor takes on the role of a certain "persona," and the "persona" is the one who actually is acting the character in the play, because this "persona" has a particular need for doing it. In South Pacific, as mentioned above, the actors

16

took on the "personas" of clients in a rehabilitation ward, who, in turn, were the ones who put on the musical as therapy, as the graduation ceremony from the institution. Bogart says:

To get to the central heat of the play, the original impulse, is to ask the question, "Who needs to perform it now, and who does it heal?"^^

One of Bogart's fundamental beliefs is that the audience should be given an important role in the theatre event. The aim is not suspension of disbelief, but that the audience members are aware that they are attending a performance and, at the same time, that they believe what is being presented on stage.^ ^ The audience should be allowed to make their own associations and have the freedom to interpret.

Bogart, thus, is dedicated to creating "stage poetry." To explain what she means by this, she brings up the difference between poetry and prose in literature, singing and speaking, and dance and pedestrian movement.^ She says: "I'm interested in stage poetry opposed to stage prose. "^^

Bogart feels that American theatre today lacks "poeticism." She suggests that psychological realism, which she finds to be limiting, is one of the reasons for this. She says:

We took the very limited aspect of his [Stanislavsky's] "method" and turned it into a religion. What I call the Americanization of the Stanislavsky System, which is really a very particular approach to psychological realism, has proven to be a highly effective acting method for film and television but I worry that it is killing the theater. It has become as all pervasive as the air we breathe. It is a mentality that so totally envelops us that we cannot see that there might be anything else. It limits the scope of theatrical possibility, not only for the actor, but the director, playwright, and designer.^^

17

This does not mean that Bogart does not find Stanislavsky's work of interest, but she feels that it should not be exclusive of other aspects and approaches: "So his whole oeuvre interests meemotional recall interests mebut not to the exclusion of everything else.""

In her development as a director, Bogart has found influences, not only from theatre artists, but also from the other artsmusic, visual arts, postmodern dance and Eastern dance and movement forms.

During her years at Bard College, Bogart and the other members of Via Theatre did training based on the physical exercises from Jerzy Grotowski's Towards a Poor Theatre.^^ She was also introduced to early postmodern dance through her teacher Aileen Passloff .^^ As she moved to New York City in 1974, she got introduced to the later work of the Judson Church grouppostmodern dance and artists from different disciplines developing works together.^^ Coe describes the theatre scene Bogart encountered at this time:

In Soho a theatrical golden age was announcing the end of the party: Richard Foreman's Rhoda in Potatoland, Meredith Monk's Quarry, the Robert Wilson-Philip Glass opera Einstein on the Beach, Mabou Mines's Beckett pieces, Andrei Serban's Greek trilogy and Richard Schechner's Mother Courage secured Bogart's fascination with environmental theatre as a nexus of postminimal form, concept and human presence."

Richard Foreman and Robert Wilson were of a great influence to Bogart. Lampe characterizes Bogart's relationship to their work as a "love-hate relationship."^^ Bogart says (quoted in Abbe's article, 1980) how when she was at Bard, she and her colleagues used to question Foreman's "dictatorial" approach:

We said he had absolutely no trust in his actors. "How can you do this to the actor? It's immoral!" We were so righteous. When I moved to New York City, I started going to see plays at

18

his loft. This was before he was taken under the wing of the avant-garde. I'd go and I'd hate it. But I'd always come back. He obviously has a very strong vision.

My feelings have changed about dictating. I think there are two distinct ways of directing, and the extremes are Richard Foreman on the one hand and Andre Gregory on the other. Gregory will rehearse for months and months and simply laugh or not laugh. Those are his reactions. That is how the actors know whether to set something or not. I'm not an extremist one way or the other.^ ^

While attending the MA program at TSOA's Department of Drama, Bogart wrote her thesis on the directing of Lee Strasberg, Andrei Serban, Richard Foreman, and Richard Schechner .^

European directors, whose work Bogart admires, are Peter Stein, Klaus Michael Griiber, Ariane Mnouchkine, and Giorgio Strehler.^^ It was an encounter with Mnouchkine that inspired Bogart to pursue creating her own company.^^

Various artists and theorists from the other arts have also been of great influence to Bogart. She says about John Cage:

John Cage has had a tremendous influence on me, not so much in his work per se, but in his theories about art. I mean, he taught me the greatest lesson. . . . He said: "If you wanna see theatre, sit down on a park bench, put a frame around what you see, and that's theatre." And I've done that almost every day of my life since I read that. That's how I learned to direct, because I looked. I put a frame around what I'm looking at, and then I don't look with desire, I look with no desire, which is a whole different ball-game. . . . I call that God's choreography. . . . What I see in the frame, out of doors, or through windows of people's suburban houses. A terrible "peeping Tom."^ ^

Furthermore, Bogart acknowledges the influence of the theories of Marcel Duchamp and Sergei Eisenstein's theories on montage.^^ Mahler taught Bogart about "line"^ ^ and transformationhow to develop a theme (see Chapter IV) .

19

Meredith Monk's use of sound,*^ and Gertrude Stein's use of a small palette of words that she "rearranges," have been of influence.^^ Hitchcock's name also frequently comes up when Bogart talks about "composition," or directing. She says:

Hitchcock understood something about art. He didn't shoot on location. He understands that if you shoot on location, everything is flat, that you can't reproduce reality. That in a sense he made . . . everything seem super-real . . . by making them . . . particularly off-kilter. So if you look at Hitchcock's films, there is always something lifted about them. But, in fact, he created them through a sense of new reality.'*

Bogart feels that it is in letting the other arts "inform" the theatre that "our salvation is":

I'm really interested in being with the movement of our time in art, you know, not behind it. The theatre is so slow. I want to keep learning about what painters are doing now, what they're thinking about . . . [what] the composers are doing, and keep informing the theatre from that, which is why I'm interested a lot in new music and new opera and what artists are thinking about .''^

20

Notes ^ Mel Gussow, "Iconoclastic and Busy Director: An

Innovator or a Provocateur?" New York Times (Late Edition), 12 March 1994, p. 11.

^ Eelka Lampe, "From the Battle to the Gift: The Directing of Anne Bogart," Drama Review, 36 (1) (Spring 1992): 14.

^ Eelka Lampe, "Collaboration and Cultural Clashing: Anne Bogart and Tadashi Suzuki's Saratoga International Theatre Institute," Drama Review, 37 (1) (Spring 1993): 147-56.

^ Robert Coe, "The Once and Future Trinity: Now Anne Bogart Holds the Key to the House that Hall Built," American Theatre, 1 (3) (June 1990): 20.

^Lampe, "Battle to Gift," 14-47.

^ Coe, 12-21,59-63.

^ J e s s i c a Abbe, "Anne B o g a r t ' s J o u r n e y s , " Drama Review, 24 (2) (June 1980) : 85 -100 .

^Abbe , 8 9 - 9 0 .

^ Anne Bogart, symposium, SITI Summer Theater Workshop, Saratoga Springs, NY, 9 June 1993.

^ Lampe, "Battle to Gift," 24.

^^ Coe, 20.

'' Ibid.

^^ Ibid.

'' Coe, 60.

^^ Ibid.

^^ Thomas M. Disch, [Review of The Baltimore Waltz], Nation, 23 March 1992, pp. 389-90.

'^'Gerald Weales, [Review of The Baltimore Waltz], Commonweal, 24 April 1992, pp. 18-19.

21

18 Greg Evans, [Review of The Baltimore Waltz], Variety,

17 February 1992, p. 77. 19 Bogart, symposium, 9 June 1993.

^ Gussow, 11.

^^ Anne Bogart, "American Theatre in the Twenties," Keynote lecture, ("Classics in Context Festival: The Roaring Twenties"), Actors Theatre of Louisville, Louisville, KY, 17 October 1993.

^^ Ben Brantley, "McLuhan's Old Message, As the Medium Mutates," [Review of The Medium], New York Times, 17 May 1994, p. C20.

^^ Anne Bogart, "composition" class, SITI Summer Theater Workshop, 2 June 1993.

^^ Heinrich von Kleist, Uber das Marionettentheater, in iJber das Marionettentheater: Aufsatze und Anekdoten, (Wiesbaden: IM Insel-Verlag, 1954), 5-13.

^^ Bogart, symposium, 9 June 1993.

'^ Ibid.

^^ Anne Bogart, "composition" class, SITI Summer Theater Workshop, 14 June 1993.

^ Bogart, symposium, 9 June 1993.

^^ Anne Bogart, "composition" class, SITI Summer Theater Workshop, 31 May 1993.

^ Anne Bogart, "composition" class, SITI Summer Theater Workshop, 7 June 1993.

^^ Bogart, "composition" class, 14 June 1993.

^^ Bogart, keynote lecture, 17 October 1993.

^^ Anne Bogart, interview by author, Saratoga Springs, NY, 22 June 1993.

^^ Lampe, "Battle to Gift," 19.

'^ Ibid.

22

36 Bogart, interview, 22 June 1993.

^^ Coe, 19.

^^ Lampe, "Battle to Gift," 22.

^^ Bogart quoted in Abbe's article, "Anne Bogart's Journeys," 92.

^ Lampe, "Battle to Gift," 20.

^^ Lampe, "Battle to Gift," 21

^^ Anne Bogart, symposium, SITI Summer Theater Workshop, 1 June 1993.

^^ Bogart, interview, 22 June 1993.

'' Ibid.

^^ Ibid.

'^ Ibid.

"^^ Bogart, "composition" class, 31 May 1993.

"^ Bogart, "composition" class, 14 June 1993.

''^Bogart, interview, 22 June 1993.

23

CHAPTER III VIEWPOINT TRAINING

Introduction The viewpoint movement philosophy that Anne Bogart has

developed is an integral part of her work. She defines it as "a philosophical approach to movement on the stage and the organization of movement on the stage."^ It is the basis for her actor training technique, called "viewpoint training," and it serves as a foundation for the staging rehearsal.

Influenced by postmodern dance, Bogart developed the viewpoint training early in her career. When asked about how the viewpoint training originated, Bogart tells about how she, when she moved to New York City in 1974, was introduced to the work of the Judson Church movement. She found this work to be "the most exciting work that was going on then."^ This encounter inspired Bogart to start collaborating with choreographers. One of her collaborators was Mary Overlie.^

Overlie introduced Bogart to the viewpoint trainingor the six-viewpoint training, as it was called earlier. While Bogart taught at the experimental theatre wing at New York University, she and Overlie co-directed several works. Bogart says: "Mary Overlie . . . essentially gave me the six viewpoints, although her six viewpoints were a little bit different. They were called things that were different."'

Bogart developed her own version of the viewpoint training by combining her own adaptation of Overlie's viewpoints and study of the Asian movement form Chuan.^ The viewpoints soon became part of Bogart's directing philosophy. Bogart says:

It became apparent to me how the six viewpoints were applicable to the theatre so clearly . . . to actors, not to dancers necessarily . . . to

24

staging . . . to a philosophy of movement on the stage with text, for Chekhov . . . you know . . . So I started using it, and developing my own thoughts about it.^

The viewpoint training consists of a series of exercises which culminate in "viewpoint improvisation." This improvisation is improvisation of movement, or sometimes both movement and sound, in space. The viewpoints are "Spatial Relationship," "Shape," "Architecture," "Kinesthetic Response," "Repetition, " "Gesture," and "Tempo." By developing an awareness of these spatial and temporal elements and a sensitivity to the energy in the group, the actors create dynamic improvisations in space. The improvisation, thus, focuses on aspects of formal composition'' and not on the narrative.

As mentioned, the viewpoint movement philosophy also serves as a foundation for the staging rehearsals. Bogart strongly believes in creating a rehearsal situation where the actors feel that they are "creators" of the work. The viewpoint training prepares the actors to "become creators" by helping them develop a sensitivity to the energy in the group and an awareness of the whole stage composition. The actors, thus, are able to create compositions, instead of being told dictatorially what to do. Bogart explains:

But even more importantly is so that when I'm working with actors on staging, I'm not having to say: "O.K., go down to stage left, turn right . . . sit down." That they understand the philosophy behind the movement choices. That they actually create the movement themselves, all of them. And it's not me dictating what the movement should be, because that doesn't really interest me at all.

Being aware of the danger of developing a technique and viewing it as an answer,^ Bogart constantly works on developing the viewpoint training, exploring new possibilities. It is a technique in constant development. (The name has even gone through changes. When there were

25

six viewpoints--"Spatial Relationship," "Shape," "Architecture," "Kinesthetic Response," "Repetition," and "Gesture"the training was called "six-viewpoint training." As the seventh, "Tempo," was added, it was renamed "seven-viewpoint training." Consequently, as new viewpoints have been added, Bogart has decided to call the training "viewpoint training."^ The different terms, thus, appear in this study.)

This chapter describes the viewpoint training as experienced from taking the workshop taught by Anne Bogart at the Saratoga International Theater Institute (SITI) in the summer of 1993, and from observing the rehearsal process of The Women, directed by Bogart at Hartford Stage, in December, 1993 through January, 1994.^ ^ It includes an objective description of some of the viewpoint exercises, the viewpoints, the viewpoint improvisation, and what appear to be important "principles" (the term "principles" is not used by Bogart) for the improvisation. The last section of the chapter is a discussion of the uniqueness of the viewpoint training and improvisation concluded from having participated in and observing the training.

Introductory Viewpoint Exercises The first session starts with warm-up exercises. The

group is asked to create a circle, a perfectly shaped circle with equal distance between each person. Each person needs to be able to see the two persons next to him or her, as well as the entire circle. Bogart leads the warm-up exercises, which emphasize releasing.

The session continues with "sun-citations." Bogart explains that these "citations" are similar to the "sun-citations" in Yoga; however, unlike Yoga, the focus is on the external. Another distinction is that here one breathes normally. The most important aim with this exercise is simultaneous movement. The focus is on

26

everyone in the circle. Again, the circle has to be perfectly shaped. The "citations" consist of a sequence of movements that is repeated twelve times. Each time the sequence is completed, one should be a little more awake than before. The tempo increases gradually each time that the sequence is repeated. Bogart encourages the group: "Ask yourself what working generously means."

After the "sun-citations," the next challenge is for the whole group to make one very high jump simultaneously, without being signaled when to start, and to land together, making no sound when landing. Bogart instructs: "Whatever happens, land together." This is attempted a couple of times, each time with Bogart challenging the actors to jump even higher, to land even more quietly, and to be even more together when landing.

Following this, everyone, still in the circle, runs in one place. One is to imagine that a golden band is gently pulling one from the head up into the sky. One should have, as Bogart calls it, "soft eyes," meaning that one should not focus on any specific point but be aware of the entire room. Shoulders should be relaxed. Feet should be like farmers' feet, muscular, strong and working heavily into the ground, while at the same time one should have the feeling of being pulled towards the sky. Then one is asked to put the hands on the heart and open up the arms, opening oneself up to the whole room.

Without the person's being assigned, someone is then to initiate a run towards the center of the circle, with the rest of the group following immediately. Anyone can initiate, but it should not be visible to a viewer who the initiator is. The first times that this is attempted, one can usually see who the initiator is. Bogart, thus, challenges the group to cooperate even better and to be more sensitive to the whole group in order to accomplish the task.

27

At this point one continues running, but now the circle is abandoned for movement on a grid system. Bogart says: "Do anything you like as long as you're running on a grid." She challenges the group: "What do you have to do to surprise yourself?" and "What do you have to do to work dangerously?"

At one point the group is asked to stop. Then the group is to continue moving on a grid, but this time everyone is asked to be aware of the first viewpoint, "Spatial Relationship" (created by the distance between each actor). Bogart stops the group a number of times and asks everyone to look at the "Spatial Relationship" that they have created. She cites when the spatial composition is strong: "Look how much more interesting."

The group continues working on a grid, this time working with either top speed or stillness. "Devour space with no fear," says Bogart, challenging the actors to increase their speed.

Still on a grid, the group then works with top speed or stillness, with being either "up" or "down" and with being aware of the "Spatial Relationship." Bogart challenges the actors with the notion that top speed also has stillness. Later the actors are asked to add the viewpoints "Shape" and "Repetition" to the work.

The group is asked to stop. The actors are then, on their own time, to start walking without fear. Soon the actors are told that, on a count from five to one, everyone is to end up in the same circle, running in the same direction and with the same speed. When this is accomplished, Bogart reminds the group that the circle should be perfectly shaped and challenges everyone to find a way, while still running, to be able to see everyone in the circle, including the persons right in front and behind.

28

This leads into the next exercise, where the group, still running in the circle, is doing "turns," "jumps," and "stops." When doing the "turn," the whole group, without anyone initiating, is to turn simultaneously and to change direction without stopping. The first times, while the group is still working out how to do the "turn," Bogart signals when to start. Eventually, however, through heightened concentration, the group has to manage on its own. The "jump," as in the exercise above, is to be as high as possible, and everyone is to land at the same time, without making any sound. The first times that this is attempted, Bogart assigns somebody to initiate the "jump." Later, however, the initiator is not assigned. After each "jump," everyone, again without anyone initiating, is to start running simultaneously and in the opposite direction. Last, when doing the "stop," somebody is to initiate a "stop" with everyone stopping simultaneously. Afterwards everyone, without anyone initiating, is to continue running simultaneously in the same direction. These are the "rules" of the "turn," the "jump," and the "stop."

The exercise consists of the group's doing twelve "turns," six "jumps," and four "stops," in any order and according to the above "rules." The group (during the SITI workshop, the class was divided into two groups) starts running. When the same rhythm and pace have been established, the "turns," "jumps," and "stops" are attempted. Bogart challenges the group to find a way to communicate physically. The group is asked to pick up speed gradually. Bogart encourages the actors again to work "generously" and to work with the spirit of keeping open for anything to happen. In the beginning problems occur; and, when they occur, the participants lose concentration for a moment. Bogart points out that one of the most important things that she wants everyone to learn from this exercise, however, is that the moment when

29

something falls apart or a mistake happens is a moment of creation. She explains that there is energy in that moment.

When all the "turns," "jumps," and "stops" have been completed (the exercise will hereafter be called "the turn-jump-stop exercise"), everyone keeps running in the circle. At a signal one is to try to touch the person in front and to make sure not to be touched by the person behind, finding a motivation or reason for doing so. This is repeated, this time running in the opposite direction and with a new motivation.

Finally everyone is to walk around freely in the room (this time not in a circle or on a grid) with presence and with "soft eyes." While walking, one is then to choose one person and make sure to keep this person in one's field of vision all the time. One should absorb as much information as possible about this person. After a while one is to choose a second person and keep both persons in the field of vision. Finally, if able, one is to choose a third, fourth and fifth person. At some point one lets go of these persons and chooses a new person. This time the actor walks up to this person as closely as possible, closer than that with which one is usually comfortable. The whole group ends up in a cluster. Everyone closes their eyes and is to absorb information about the persons that one is close tohow they feel and how they smell. Then, in one's own time, one opens the eyes, while trying to keep the other sensessmell and touchalive. Each person then begins to move away from the cluster.

Introduction to "Shape" and "Kinesthetic Response"

"Shape" The whole group forms a large circle. One person runs

in to the center and creates a strong pose. The next person runs in and builds to the shape or "sculpture." One

30

by one, the rest of the group adds to the shape, so that finally everyone is part of the "sculpture." Bogart chooses a couple of people to remain in their pose as the rest of the group runs out again to study the remaining shape. The compositioh and the dynamics of the shape are being discussed. "Where does your eye go?" asks Bogart.

This is repeated a few times. Bogart encourages the group to work in riskier ways by using parts of the body that one is less comfortable with using. She also warns against the tendency of people joining the "sculpture" with their hands, which tends to make a less interesting choice. At times, as a new shape has been created, people are asked to title the "sculpture."

"Kinesthetic Response" The class is divided into teams of four or five. The

teams line up, like swim-teams, at one side of the room. The first person ("number one") runs across the floor, along his or her team's "lane," inventing one movement or action during the course of the run. Each member of the team, one by one, repeats "number one's" movement across the floor. "Number two" then adds a movement or action to what "number one" has created. Everyone repeats this new cross. In turn the rest of the team, and then beginning with "number one" and "number two" again, add to the cross, until a whole sequence has been created. The last person is asked to make a vaudevillian "wow-ending" to the sequence. Each team, now with the members lined up one by one along the wall, performs the sequence in unison to the rest of the class.

Then new groups are formed, consisting of the persons with the same number from the different teams. All the "number ones," for instance, make up the first team. This time the members of each team are to perform their different sequences together, and now they move freely in

31

the entire room, abandoning their "lanes." The performers find a spatially dynamic beginning point, and then create an improvisation of movements in space. Each one performs his or her own sequence, disregarding the tempo of the original sequence and, instead, timing each movement and action by responding to what is happening in the rest of the group. The participants have now been introduced to "Kinesthetic Response"the timing of movement. Awareness of "Spatial Relationship" is also part of this exercise.

The Viewpoints After these introductory exercises, the group starts

working with viewpoint improvisation. To teach the viewpoints to the actors, Bogart starts going through each of them separately. The class is divided into groups of seven, and each group does an improvisation focusing on one viewpoint at a time. Bogart stresses that it is really impossible to separate the viewpoints and that they should not be viewed as separate. This time, however, in order for everyone to understand what each of the viewpoints is, one focuses 90% on each particular viewpoint.

"Spatial Relationship" "Spatial Relationship" is defined by Bogart as distance

(distance to the other actors). The seven actors start moving in the room, being aware of the "Spatial Relationship" and always maintaining a dynamic "composition" in space. Bogart challenges the actors to work against what one in everyday life would consider as comfortable distance to other people, by being either closer to each other than what feels comfortable or by being very far from each other. The stage picture constantly changes. Whenever a person or a small group crosses the room, it causes the rest of the group to move in order to maintain strong spatial "compositions," or

32

"Spatial Relationship." At times, clusters of people are formed, and at times tension is created through juxtaposition between an individual and a whole group. Bogart occasionally side-coaches, reinforcing to the actors when strong choices are being made or pointing out the moments that are weak. At times she asks the group to stop and maintain positions for a moment so that they can study the "Spatial Relationship." As she did with the "Shape" exercise above, Bogart discusses composition with the actors in order to increase their awareness. Bogart also reminds the actors that they, through the way they work with the space, can communicate to an audience how the space is or the feel of the space.

"Shape" Bogart explains that this viewpoint applies to creating

shapes either individually or in relationship to other shapes or people. The actors explore creating "sculptures" alone or in groups. Instead of thinking about what the shape should look like, they should allow shape to be created through themselves.

Bogart instructs: Extend through shape. Where does it take you? Let it lead you to another shape. If it leads you to something unfamiliar, you're doing the right thing. How do you go through space with shape? Find a way to enjoy shape.

"Architecture" This viewpoint is about the actor's relationship to or

use of the architecture. The actor works physically with the architecture or the physical space. Bogart admits that this viewpoint might be the hardest on which to work. She explains that the actor should think of it as doing a dance with the architecture or the set. The actor is asked to

33

consider the following: "How can you do a duet with architecture?" and "Use the architecture as a partner."

The actors start exploring the room. In the dance studio used for the SITI workshop, the "stage-right" wall had large windows that could be opened, with floor length curtains and with a view of the trees of the Skidmore campus; a bare wall with a double door leading into a storage room was the "upstage" wall; and the "stage-left" wall was bare. These and the pattern of the wooden dance floor and the patterns in the ceiling became the actors' set. (For the viewpoint sessions for the rehearsal of The Women, the rehearsal stage, even though it lacked many of the features of the actual set, gave the actors a chance to start exploring the potentials for the use of the set for the show.)

Bogart reminds the actors that architecture can make one feel something. "Let it talk back to you," she says. She also reminds the actors that their use of architecture expresses the character. She admits that actors who have the ability to work with the physical space, as well as with the relationship to other actors, are her favorite actors.

"Kinesthetic Response" "Kinesthetic Response" is defined as timing, that is,

timing of movement. It is the actor responding in the moment to what is happening in the room. It is about responding, not initiating. It is not about creating rhythm, but about reacting to rhythm. Bogart gives an example of "Kinesthetic Response" in everyday life. At a bus stop, if one person turns, everyone else, subconsciously, ends up turning. Even though all the viewpoints are important, Bogart suggests that this is perhaps the most important one.

34

One of the actors suddenly runs across the floor, which unleashes a lot of activity on the floor. A thump of somebody falling on to the floor suddenly ignites tramping on the floor. Someone suddenly being in a certain shape influences someone else to explore creating another shape in response. As the actors are working in the beginning, Bogart helps them to become aware of the potential flow of timing. When suddenly a strong movement or a certain noise happens that potentially could unleash a reaction, she calls out, "Use that." The reaction needs to be immediate and spontaneous. Bogart instructs: "If you think about it, it's too late."

"Repetition" This viewpoint is about repetition done either

individually or in relationship to the other actors. For instance, one actor repeats a certain gesture over and over again, or one actor does a certain gesture which then gets repeated by others in the group.

Bogart feels that repetition is the most important tool for building the mise en scene. She acknowledges being influenced by Gertrude Stein with her use of a small palette of words. This has made Bogart realize the potential for using a small palette of gestures when creating the mise en scene. Bogart suggests repeating twenty gestures in different combinations, rather than using a thousand. Bogart also feels that, through repetition, one can get deeper into the character.

"Gesture" Bogart distinguishes "Gesture" from "Shape." A

"Gesture" has a beginning, middle, and end. Working with "Shape," however, takes the actor gradually from one shape into another shape. Bogart views "Gestures" as entirely culturally related and encourages the actors to "embrace

35

the stereotype." "Do it with the whole being in order to make it work," she says. She also observes that doing gestures tends to have an exorcistic quality.

"Tempo"

"Tempo"the pace or the speed of doing thingswas added in the fall of 1993. Bogart previously considered "Tempo" as part of "Kinesthetic Response," but has started treating it as a separate viewpoint. She feels that she is still experimenting with how to implement it into the work.

After having gone through each of the viewpoints, each actor is to choose the viewpoint that he or she found to be the easiest to work with. After a while each actor is to choose another viewpoint. Last, one is to choose the viewpoint one had the hardest time with and "do it with vengeance."

Viewpoint Improvisation Viewpoint improvisation is improvisation of movementat

times movement and soundin space. The viewpoints "Spatial Relationship," "Shape," "Architecture," "Kinesthetic Response," "Repetition," "Gesture," and "Tempo"provide in the actors an awareness, which helps them create, as a group, dynamic improvisations in space. One could say that the viewpoints create a structure within which the actors can function.

For each improvisation the group usually consists of seven actors. The rest of the class becomes the audience watching from one side of the room. The seven actors line up along the "upstage" wall. The beginning of the improvisation is restricted to movement in lanes perpendicular to the wall. Each actor works in his or her own lane (again like swimming lanes), and there are three choices of movement--running, walking and falling. Being aware of the viewpoints, the actors start moving in their

36

lanes. Since they are separated by lanes, the actors' awareness of the whole room needs to be even more acute in order to be able to respond to the whole group.

After awhile the actors, on their own time and when they feel a need to, open up to start moving on a grid. Now they work freely, without the restrictive choices of running, walking and falling. Eventually the grid is abandoned, and the actors move freely around in the room.

Bogart has recently added another stage in the sequence. After working on a grid and before opening up to free movement on the floor, diagonals are added to the movement pattern, allowing movement in eight directions. The sequence, thus, is lanes (running, walking or falling), grid, diagonal patterns and free movement on the floor.

Sometimes the improvisation starts directly with free movement on the floor, without first going through lanes, grid and diagonal patterns. The actors then start by finding a strong beginning point with a dynamic spatial "composition."

The length of each improvisation varies. During the SITI workshop the first improvisations were relatively short, about four to five minutes long, but gradually they became longer, extending to ten, fifteen and thirty minutes.

At times Bogart adds music or themes to the viewpoint improvisation. In both cases the new element is brought in some time into the improvisation, after it has been established. She explains that music is added to make the actor feel more at home in the improvisation. She warns, however, not to "get trapped in the music." One should instead take what one gets from the musicrhythm, for instanceand go further with it. "Use it as a springboard, not as a prison," she says. Examples of themes that are added are "first date," "reunion," "love," "rush-hour" and "mine-field." Bogart stresses that one

37

should not act these out. Instead one should "make the theme happen," or "let it into the spinal column."

Sound is also introduced to the work. Bogart has recently started adding sound to the viewpoint improvisation. By producing sounds or uttering phrases, the actors improvise whole "compositions" of movements, gestures, shapes, sounds, and words. When using sounds, the actors are encouraged, as with their physical work, to reprocess the vocabulary established in an improvisation by reusing the same sounds and words.

These are a few of the viewpoint exercises and viewpoint improvisation variations that Bogart teaches. As mentioned, Bogart is constantly experimenting with new exercises and variations in the viewpoint training.

Important "Principles" of the Viewpoint Improvisation^^

Response One could argue that response is the basis for the

philosophy of the viewpoint improvisation. In an attempt to describe the response cycle, one receives a stimulus which ignites a reaction; this reaction starts an action to which one instantaneously fully commits; in the middle of pursuing this action other stimuli occur, which makes one abandon the current action and respond to a new stimulus.

The improvisation is centered around responding or reacting, as opposed to initiating action. One is constantly picking up stimuli from the entire room and responding to them. A sound, a gesture, somebody suddenly running diagonally across the floor, or suddenly noticing the pattern on the floor may trigger a reaction. One may suddenly find oneself in a certain position in relation to another person, and both may start exploring by developing a "sculpture" together. Bogart explains:

It's not making things happen, but seeing things happening.

38

There is always something happening. Use what's already happened. Let things happen through you.

Be open to what the others do and use it.

You don't have to be inventive. Trust that it will happen, happen through you.

This approach demands of the participants a heightened awareness. Bogart explains at the end of one class period that the state one is in right before doing a turn in "the turn-jump-Stop exercise," described above, is the kind of state one should always be in when working. This level of openness, excitement and concentration should always be present.

One needs to work with a high level of awareness and alertness. First, one needs to be aware of the entire room--both the physical space and what happens in the rest of the group. One should have "soft eyes" or "soft focus." It is important that one does not focus in on certain areas but that one is open and receptive to what might happen anywhere in the room, including what is outside one's field of vision. One should be aware of the whole. Bogart side-coaches: "Pick up on what you least expect to," and "Use what's farthest away."

Second, one needs to work with a high level of alertness or readiness. The response should be instantaneous and spontaneous. One should not plan in advance the focus of one's response. It all should happen in the moment. Bogart says:

Let yourself not know what's going to happen. Surprise yourself about what you pick up on. Pick up faster than you usually do. Respond to things you least expect to work with. Be open to work with what you do not expect to work with.

Bogart stresses, furthermore, that one should not focus on selecting which things to which to respond. Although she realizes that in actuality the participant always, to a

39

certain degree, selects which stimuli to respond to, one should not consciously focus on it.

The improvisation demands the intensity of being able to pick up on any stimuli and instantaneously commit fully to the action that it has triggered. One does not, however, carry this action to a completion. Just as one is in the middle of pursuing the action, other stimuli will occur that will ignite new responses. One allows oneself to commit fully to something and then suddenly lets it go to pursue other actions.

Bogart says:

Enter fully with one choice, knowing that it will change. The moment you feel attached to something, go on to something else. Don't put an end to what you're doing. Don't decide where it is going to end. The moment something becomes precious, let it go.

In this manner, one goes from one response to another. The response or reaction should be in the body or should

"happen through oneself." For instance, during "the turn-jump-stop exercise" the participants are introduced to the challenge of communicating physically with the rest of the group. Many of the exercises seem to aim at training the actor to sense and experience the space. During the viewpoint improvisations, Bogart side-coaches:

Don't make decisions with the head, but with the body. Don't think. Trust that the seven viewpoints are in you. [Again,] If you think about it, it's too late. Let things happen through you.

Discovery The viewpoint improvisation has here been discussed as

being a series of responses, but it could also be viewed as a series of discoveries, a journey or a quest for making discoveries, with each stimulus being a potential for a new

40

discovery. The whole group makes discoveries together. Bogart says: "Do not do things to the others, but discover together." Bogart encourages the participants to work with the idea that, as one is making discoveries, one then shares these with the audience, saying to them, "Look at this." The spirit of enjoyment over finding things, exploration and discovery seem to be important aspects of the viewpoint improvisation.

Risk-taking Risk-taking is another important aspect of this

improvisation. Bogart constantly challenges the participants: "Work in a riskier way," and "Go further than you think you can." Many of the exercises seem to have been designed to help the actors overcome possible blocks. Bogart repeatedly encourages everyone: "Surprise yourself."

Stillness, Variation, Clarity and Specificity

In the beginning of the workshop the improvisations have a tendency to have fast paced and staccato-like movements and blurred "composition." Bogart, thus, reminds everyone to listen more carefully to what is happening in the room, especially increasing the awareness of what is happening behind one. She also draws attention to making stillness a part of the "compositions" and avoiding excess movement. One should try to create more variation in the "composition" by having a greater range of intervals. To illustrate her point, Bogart compares this to the variations in a symphony. There should be differentiation. A reaction should not necessarily be equal to the stimulus. Bogart also emphasizes clarity and specificity in the work. She warns against doing general movements. She feels that it is better to stop if one feels lost, rather than doing some general dance movements.

41

"Icing on the Cake" As mentioned earlier, the focus of the viewpoint

improvisation is on the formal. The viewpoints help the actors to become aware of spatial and temporal "composition." The focus, thus, is not on creating stories. Bogart acknowledges that sometimes stories, relationships or emotions may occur spontaneously in the moment; and she encourages the participants to enjoy them if they happen, while, at the same time, being open for new things for response. She regards stories or emotions occurring as "icing on the cake." She stresses, however, that this occurrence should not be a conscious effort: "Do not work for the stories to happen." Bogart also warns against concentrating on ideas. She says: "Don't impose your ideas," and "Ideas cheapen work easily."

"Lyricism" Towards the end of the four week workshop at SITI,

Bogart explains to the participants in the class that they have reached the stage to start "putting finishing detail" on the work. She asks the class to start finding lyricism in the work: "Let yourself go to find lyricism." Work with imageryresponding to imageryis introduced. She explains that, when images emerge, one should pursue them, allowing the imagery to extend through the body, and then let it go. Similar to responding to other stimuli as described earlier, one should not hang on to a certain image. Exercises encouraging further exploration of creation of shapes (with two or more persons), sharing weight and lifting are also introduced. Bogart stresses the importance of suspension in seeking heightened moments in the theatre. She feels that theatre tends to be too weighted. Some of the last reminders that she gives the class before starting one of the last improvisations of the workshop are "lyricism," "extension" and "freedom."

42

Conclusion The viewpoint training appears to be unique in the way

it creates a group awareness and how it develops in the actor an awareness of temporal and spatial composition. The group awareness is established early on during the introductory exercises. A number of the exercises are centered around unison movement, with a leader and without a leader. Being able to accomplish this task demands an acute awareness of the group. Many of the exercises use the structure of a circle.

The viewpoint improvisation further strengthens this group awareness. The key to this is the fact that the focus is on reacting rather than initiating action. The focus is on the whole group and what is right for the composition, and not on individual accomplishments. Through responding to what is happening at any given moment, the whole group organically develops the improvisation in space.

To refer to my own experience participating in the workshop, I was struck by this group awareness. I particularly recall "the turn-jump-stop exercise." It established the need for being sensitive to and communicating well with the group. It also gave the experience of what it feels like working as a unit. As we were running in the large circle, with our upper bodies lightly twisted, enabling us to see everyone in the group and with our feet hitting the floor simultaneously, I truly felt that I was part of a wholelike I was part of a whole organism. It was as if the heavy beat of our feet hitting the floor was the heartbeat of this organismthe life nerve holding us together. We also shared the alertness for suddenly doing a "turn," "jump," or "stop" together. The moment, the fraction of a second, before we would jump together, was a moment of excitement and oneness.

43

Looking back at the viewpoint improvisation, I remember the exhilarating sensation of "Kinesthetic Response," the moment when a reaction was unleashed in me. This felt to be particularly strong when a strong stimulus would occur, triggering in return a strong response. The sound of a loud clap, for instance, could trigger a quick movement across the floor. At this point I would feel like I was part of a machinery, as if a spring had been released to push me along to accomplish my "operation."

The training, particularly the viewpoint improvisation, develops in the actor a sensitivity to timing or temporal composition. The improvisation has a unique sense of flow and movement. There is always an energy flowing, even at the times when there is stillness. This appears to be due to the constant alertness and awareness in the whole group. Furthermore, the immediacy in the "Kinesthetic Response" pushes the flow of the composition constantly forward, by connecting the stimulus and the reaction. The fact that one never finishes one action but that one responds to a new stimulus while in the middle of pursuing the current action, also contributes to the flow.

The awareness of the "Spatial Relationship" also appears to strengthen the flow or movement. In order to maintain a dynamic spatial composition, one movement or change of position in one actor will trigger a change in the rest of the group. For instance, one actor running from "upstage right" to "downstage left" will tilt the balance and, if the whole group is sufficiently aware, eventually will lead to a movement or change in the whole stage composition.

The spatial awareness that the training develops in the actor is equally unique. The early exercises seem to be designed to make the actor start experiencing the feel of the whole space and to increase his or her sensitivity towards it. The work in lanes and on a grid seems to force the actor to start acknowledging the entire space rather

44

than giving in to the tendency of automatically gravitating towards the center of the room. The actor is also challenged to explore the different levels of the space. In one of the exercises, walking on a grid, one is to be either "up" or "down." When working with the "Architecture" viewpoint, the actor is challenged to explore the potentials of the physical space or the set. It is a way for the actor to learn to enjoy working with the physical space, without having to think about character and text.

During the viewpoint improvisation, the actors, being aware of the viewpoints "Architecture," "Spatial Relationship," "Shape," and "Gesture," create spatially dynamic compositions. These spatial elements help create variety, clarity and tension in the total composition.

Rather than being forced choreography or blocking, the composition created through the viewpoint improvisation has the potential of being a creation that is alive and dynamic. If everyone in the group is truly aware of each other and the whole, the composition through the viewpoints has the potential to be "a breathing organism in space." All improvisations, one could argue, will always have the potential of creating a composition with flow or "a breathing organism." This improvisation, however, through the structure provided by the viewpoints and the "principles" of the improvisation, may not only create flow, but also help avoid unintentionally chaotic or blurred composition. The viewpoint improvisation has the potential to be both liberating and spontaneous and, on the other hand, dynamic and strong compositionally.

45

Notes

^ Anne Bogart, interview by author, Hartford, CT, 30 December 1993.

Anne Bogart, interview by author, Saratoga Springs, NY, 22 June 1993.

^ Ibid.

' Ibid.

Ibid.

Ibid.

5

6

-1

Bogart does not view the viewpoint improvisation as a composition. Composition, to her, means the actual composition choreographed or "set" during the rehearsal of a piece or a production. The term "composition" is in this chapter used by author to address the compositional aspects of the improvisation or the use of the physical space.

Bogart, interview, 22 June 1993.

^ Bogart, symposium, SITI Summer Theater Workshop, Saratoga Springs, NY, 1 June 1993.

^ According to a phone conversation with Bogart on 30 June 1994, "Duration" and "Topography" are recent viewpoints that have been added.

^^ The descriptions of the training and the quotes by Bogart in this chapter are taken from author's journal.

^^ Again, Bogart does not talk about the viewpoint improvisation in terms of "principles." The term "principles" and the subheadings in this section are used by author for clarification and discussion.

46

CHAPTER IV

DIRECTING PHILOSOPHY

As suggested in the Introduction, Anne Bogart's belief in rehearsal as a collaborative process and the actor as a "creator" seems to be the underlying value of her directing philosophy. The first section of this chapter addresses how this value defines the nature of collaboration between the actors and the directorthat the rehearsal is not about what the director "wants" but what the actors and the director create collectively.

The second section addresses various aspects of Bogart's directing philosophy. It discusses the relationship between the viewpoint training and the rehearsal process; Bogart's belief that the formthe choreographyis what should be "set" while emotions should remain "fluid," and that this form, the structure, gives the actor freedom; and Bogart's analogy that a staging rehearsal is like composing a piece of music. The section concludes with Bogart's recollection of the episode when she came to the realization that "setting something on stage," or "composing" the scenes, is a "violent act," but "necessary violence."

Rehearsal: A Meeting Place Anne Bogart sees rehearsal as a collaborative process

"a meeting place between actors and director."^ She attempts to create a rehearsal situation or atmosphere where the actors feel that they are "creators" and not merely persons fulfilling the director's vision or "want." Many actors, however, being used to the latter, do not view themselves as creators. Bogart, thus, feels that one of

her functions as a director is to reassure or encourage them to "become creators":

47

You see, the problem I have with most theatre situations is that . . . the actors don't believe that they are creators. So a huge part of my job is to . . . allow them to be creators, and for them to recognize that their creation is an absolute necessity, otherwise I wouldn't be there; there's no reason for me to be there. And I'm not the kind of director who just directs them. I don't do that.^

One of the reasons that the actors do not see themselves as creators is the often prevailing attitude in theatre that the actor is fulfilling the director's "wants" or doing "what the director wants." Bogart sees this as a "deadly"^ philosophy. She addresses the participants at the SITI Summer Theater Workshop:

I think that the word "want" is killing the American theatre. Now I'll tell you why. In a rehearsal what does the director do? The director says, "I want you to . . . this." But what does an actor do: "Do you want me to . . . this?" What kind of relationship is that? It seems to me to be parental. I get so frustrated and upset if, in a rehearsal, an actor says to me, "What do you want me to do?" . . . What about "What the play wants?" . . . If you as an actor . . . if what you are doing is fulfilling the director's "want," isn't there something wrong with that? . . . I am trying, personally, to get the word "want" out of the rehearsal. . . . What I'm suggesting to you is that the excision of the word "want" is so radical and so radically affects the psychology of a rehearsal that I can't even begin to tell you how different it is.^

Bogart suggests other phrases in the rehearsal dialogue: "What's right?"; "What's true?"; "Is this better?"; "Is this in the right direction?"^

Bogart continues her discussion on eliminating the word "want" from the rehearsal: "Also what I want is really small compared to what I think the play is."^ She proposes that there are two different ways for both the actor and the director to approach a work. She says to the actor

48

about how to approach the character: "You can either think of it as something smaller than you that you control and define, or you can think of it as something larger than you."' Bogart believes in the latter approach. An indication that the actor is working according to the former approach is the response, "My character wouldn't do that."^ "Then you know that the definitions have gone far too soon," Bogart says.^

Likewise she warns against the director saying, "I know this play." She feels that defining "what the play is" too early easily becomes reductive:

It becomes reductive. If you understand it and it's smaller than you, then the play will be smaller than you . . . I want to be a little girl in front of a huge canvas. I think it should be . . . it must be . . . huge for me and undefinable. And I should really look at it with great awe and really enter into it with bravery . . . How do you let the thing you're working on be bigger than you? It's really scary, because that also means that it's out of your control.^

In proposing what the nature of collaboration between actors and director should be, she makes a comparison to the relationship between astronauts and the person in the control tower:

I think of myself as . . . I'm in the control tower and the actors the astronauts. And the actors are having the experience and I'm going, "Try it a little to the right." It's not [so], "I want you to be to the right." It's because . . . there is something about being to the right.''

Instead of rehearsal being about what the director "wants," it is about what the actors and the director create collectively in the moment.